tv C-SPAN Weekend CSPAN March 26, 2011 10:00am-6:00pm EDT
in discussing this report, the problems at the plant were that it experienced small electrical fires. the interesting thing about the report is that the nuclear regulatory commission said they still feel the plant is safe but there are things they can do to improve on the problems. you see the administration coming out and saying right now everything is safe, but we're going to go back and look at everything again. host: nadia is on the line for democrats. caller: i have a question. i would like to talk to you a little bit about ohio. we have an earthquake here 30 years ago. there was one in 1999. host: i do not want to have to cut you off but we're getting ready to go to an event in iowa. i need you to be quick.
caller: we had an earthquake here 30 years ago and one in 1990. i just wanted to talk about it. host: we're going to leave it there. john mcardle of greenwire, thank you for being on the program. we go live to the conservative principles conference taking place in the wides moines, iowa. we will be hearing from possible republican contenders. that is going on live on c-span. we will see you here tomorrow morning for "washington journal thank you forebrain us safely here -- for bringing us here.
we have the freedom to gather this way and the freedom to glorify and praise you and come to you in prayer knowing he will meet every need and should we only speak it, you will be there with us. the us a joyful heart so that we might serve you in all we do. in jesus' name we pray. amen. >> if you will continue standing for the pledge of allegiance. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all. thank you. you may be seated. we have a great lineup for you this morning. before we get to that, i have a few programming notes.
you've got a program when you came in today. it reads from left to right in order of the speakers. we do have a little change in the program. senator rick santorum could not be here today. he sent his regrets. he did everything he could to be here. after the family values panel we will adjourn for a one hour lunch break. lunch will be a $10 a box lunch available to you right outside where you registered. you can try to navigate through the sky walk in beautiful downtown des moines. we will reconvene one hour after that. one last thing. this is a little important. turn off cell phones or put them in silenct mode. i am the director of the conservative principles pac
congressman steve king's leadership back. pac. it is my honor to introduce this morning's host of the conservative principles conference. he has been a centerpiece unconstitutional conservatism. he formed the conservative principles pac to endorse candidates that would adhere to the --that would elect candidates that would adhere to the conservative principles. he is not only the congressman from our own western iowa, he is the congressman for all of those who believe in restoring the pillars of american exceptionalism. welcome mike congressman, steve king. [applause]
-- my congressman, steve king. >> thank you very much. good morning. this is a great way to start a conference. anyone who woke up half asleep is more like i did is wide awake and ready to go. i what is wide awake and ready to go. we will launch this caucus season so we can stand on these proposed and hopefully the principles we and body will be those embodied by one or more -- that we embody will be embodied by one or more of the presidential candidates. you as an activist iowans have
more to say about the agenda and the planks in the platform and who the next president of the united states will be. it is an extraordinary responsibility. it is a privilege and a blessing. you step up to it with great enthusiasm. i know the basis of knowledge many of you bring into this role. i know how seriously you take this. to start this off this morning i was just sitting in and thinking how do i best describe what is that makes america great and the constitutional conservative principles that i believe need to be embodied in the next president of the united states. i went back to 1997 when i was a freshman in the united states senate. i would read everything. it took me three years for me to
figure out i did not need to read all of that. i also thought i should read the code of iowa. i came to the education chapter in the code of iowa. i was reading through there and it said, each child in iowa shall receive a global, not- sexist, multi-cultural education. -- non-sexist multicultural education. that means all of the schools in the state would have acto teach multiculturalism. i have never been a fan of any of those things. [applause] i took out a bill draft request form to write a bill to strike all of that language out of there. i would get that drafted and get it filed.
i thought, if i just strike the language out that calls for the global non-sexist multiculturalism. but i thought people would think i did not believe in everything. i wrote a bill to replace it. strike up the language about global non-sexist multiculturalism. each child would be taught bad the united states is -- would be taught that the united states is the greatest nation in the world based on free enterprise capitalism. [applause] i remember i was green and i leave -- and naive.
i introduced the bill and you just drop it in the clerk's box and it would work its way through the system. the next morning, i went inside the house chambers and every democrat had their lights on. they wanted to talk, everyone of them. i am sitting there this innocent baby. they would get up and said, speaking introduce this bill. the audacity to say that the united states is the u.n. challenged greatest nation in the world. he wants to get rid of multiculturalism. they took turns beating on me. i am sitting there thinking, what is this hyperventilation about? aren't these things true? i will go further. i believe god guided our founding fathers.
he moved them around like men on a chess board to ship this nation. we need to defend and uphold what they did. it is not just to protect what we had. it is not just to declared that the shining city on the hill has been achieved. it has not. when and if it is, ronald reagan never said you can go home. he said we need to take ourselves to another level. we need to take this nation up to the next level of our destiny. i am hopeful that the next president of the united states, whose ideas and principles you help forge it today, will lay out an agenda and you can shape the plant and the platform for the next president of the united states, whose ticket will be punched out of i will and will be on his way to new hampshire. i hope we can link what we believe in on the whole spectrum of the seventh of ideas and but
another ticket out of new hampshire now to south carolina and launched that president to the white house so that barack obama is a one-term president. [applause] in the process i want to do this. if you are going to have a victory, you have to imagine that victory in your mind's eye. i have laid out a strategy for the repeal of obamacare. here is the balance of this strategy. we pass the repeal in the house. we need to continue to put the pressure on the senate. we need to shut off the funding to implement obamacare off $5.50 billion in automatic spending has to be shut off. we have to elect a president who will pledge to sign the repeal of obamacare. the next president of the united states will be sworn in on a
january 20, 2013 in the the west of the capital. when he or she stands there and take that oath of office, i would like to have at present is a with pen in hand. [laughter] [applause] i really like it when you get the pipeline before i get to it. i want him to say, so help me god. and before he shakes hands with chief justice roberts, i want him to sign the repeal of obamacare write there. welcome to the conference. i am looking forward to this day. i would be just as happy sitting in these seats soaking up the message coming from the candidates. the panelists we have our full spectrum conceptus. they are constitutional conservatives, as are you.
the-they are full spectrum conservatism's. -- they are full spectrum conservatives. who is ready to kick off a caucus. ? >> our first speaker is currently serving his eighth term as governor of mississippi. he served in president ronald reagan's administration as the director of the white house office of public affairs. in barbour is highly regarded for his accomplishments -- haley barbour is highly regarded for his accomplishments. in 2003, he waon the primary and general election to become governor of his home state. he was easily reelected in 2007. during his second term, he took
over as chairman of the republican governors association, which saw a tremendous success in the last cycle. we appreciate all of these efforts and welcome him back to iowa. latest and gentlemen governor haley barbour. -- ladies and gentlemen governor haley barbour. [applause] >> thank you very much. thank you all very much. i am glad to be a. that me say to all of you, we are on the fast, hard clock here. steve told me i have 16 minutes and 48 seconds. i told him i should have lager. he told me i was lucky he was letting me do this without an interpreter. [laughter] >> i heard them cheering for
you. >> thank you for being here. i want to talk to you because it is a short. bank of time. for 2012, it is -- i want to talk to you because it is a short period of time. for 2012, it is crucial that we elect a new president. the only way is for us to make sure that, like the 2010 campaign the 2012 campaign is focused on policy. focus on the policies of this administration which are bad for the economy bad for job creation, and focus on what the right policies would be. the american people agree with us on policy. they showed in the 2010 election the most massive
repudiation of any president's policies in the history of the united states for good reason. let me just say, that is the one thing we want to be focused on. i will describe it this way. some of you are old enough to remember ed sullivan. maybe a couple of you. they say one time and sullivan had the most popular television show in the country -- ed sullivan had the most popular television show in the country. one night, he had conrad hilton on his show. he was the bill gates of the day. and sullivan turned to him as he walked out and say if you could only tell the american people one thing, what would it be? conrad hilton said, but the shower curtain inside the back up? th tub. [laughter]
there is a man who knew what was important to him. what is important to us is to have a new president january 20 of 2013. [applause] we cannot lose focus on that. that is why i say this election needs to be about policy. when president obama was elected, the american people thought they were going to focus laser light on the economy on growing the economy and job creation. the policies of this administration, in every case, has made it harder to create jobs and less likely to have economic growth. the president has been calling for the largest tax increase in american history. tax increases fall primarily on employers. he fought for it for the whole two years. his first two years we had haiti over the economy the largest health -- largest we had
a hang over the pot be the largest tax increase in american history -- had any over the economy the largest tax increase in american history. no republican senator would vote for this huge tax increase. he threw in the towel and voted with the republicans. our friends in the news media the ones in the back talking -- [applause] our friends in the news media said this heralded a move to the center like bill clinton's triangulation, like obama had learned his lesson. it reminded me of president reagan, my old boss. he is to say the first place in the democratic playbook was to take up the metal and run around the left end. -- the middle and run around
the left end. in the state of the union address, he still said he wanted that tax increase and that he would try to get it. his budget called for $1.30 trillion of tax increases on the american people. $90 billion in the increases on the oil and gas industry. who is going to pay for that? exxon? that is going to be paid by the people who are pumping gas into their cars. it makes economic growth less likely and job creation more difficult. the same is true in spending. the obama administration is populated by people who have unlimited in limited government
-- limitless government. they think a bigger government means a bigger economy. a bigger government means a smaller economy. [applause] when the government sucks all the money out of the economy how is the private sector supposed to create jobs? the date on this is simple. when government spending goes up, private investment -- the date on this is simple -- data on this is simple. when private investment goes up unemployment goes down. private investment goes up, more people are working. remember that is our goal. when we talk about cutting spending we are talking about cutting spending for our children and grandchildren. we are talking about cutting
spending because of the effects on the deficit and the debts. . we need to cut spending to grow the economy. your family cannot spend itself rich. the government cannot spend itself rich either. if you took the president also budget after the move to the metiddle, it called for the deficit to go up $1.60 trillion. just imagine you are running your business that way taking a and 43% less than you spend. -- taking in 43% less than you spend. if you wrote a book, you would start it with chapter 11. [applause] it is not just capture -- not
just taxes and spending. look at health care. steve was up here talking about health care. the government run health care system is not in the interest of anybody in the night -- in the united states except the government. that is what we will get if we get obamacare. i have been in these wars were years and years. betsy is going to speak after me. she was deeply involved in the hillary-care issue. i never thought the point of health care was to make health insurance premiums go up. how do employers hire more people when they do not know what their obligations or costs for health care of those employees will be. obama's policies hurt job creation stymie economic
growth and perhaps the worst is his energy policy. the obama energy policy is to drive up the cost of energy so that americans will use less of it. think about it. that is their policy. i can remember president obama himself when he was a candidate for president interviewed by the "san francisco chronicle." he said, electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket. necessarily skyrocket. the estimate was 30% to 50%. how you grow the economy when costs are going up for businesses and families? that is what they are trying to do. it is really environmental policy not energy policy. a real energy policy would be more american energy. that is what we need in our
country. [applause] as gasoline blows by $3.50 a gallon remember how this administration has shut down oil production in the gulf of mexico. in the gulf, we produce 30% of the domestic production of oil in the united states. the administration quickly announced that this week and last week we gave to permits for drilling in the gulf. you had to read the fine print to find out they were not permits for new wells. they work permits to resume drilling on wells they had forced them to stop drilling on. we need more oil. we need more gas. we need more coal. we need more nuclear. we need more american energy.
[applause] that includes alternatives. my state is a center for biofuels. we have an ethanol plant in mississippi. we generate energy from other things. from would -- from wood, from waste. we need all of the above. when we talk about more american energy, we need all of the above. we need efficiently and conservation. from the time the british dropped anger in jamestown what of our advantages has been -- dropped angerchor in jamestown one of our advantages has been abundant energy. we need more.
[applause] psychiatrists say it is a mistake to stifle the urge to applaud. [laughter] if it is not bad for you, it is bad for me. i appreciate your perseverance. [laughter] you can see as we look through the policies of this administration why we want to the next election to be about policy. these are the wrong policies. these policies make it harder for us to create jobs. we should not ever forgets that the goal is not to cut spending for the sake of cutting spending. the goal is to grow the economy. the goal is to return to the chance where every young man and woman can live the american dream and see the opportunities
in front of them. when we talk about these policies i urge you to remember the most important thing. cutting spending is the means to an end. the end is to can you to grow our economy to continue to improve the quality of life for americans. my old friend and fellow mississippian, fred smith the ceo and founder of federal express has a great saying. he says the main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing. [laughter] the main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing. the main thing is economic growth and job creation for our people. [applause] that will solve a multitude --
do the math on what 4.5% growth in gdp would do for our budget deficit. look at ronald reagan's time after the 1978 to 1982 recessionary. period. the economy was growing 9%. this economy is growing 2.8%. most of that growth is because of this gigantic bill louche of federal spending. -- deluge of federal spending. we need to grow the private economy. that needs to be our primary focus. growing the economy takes a change of policy. why is it worth so much? think about the people who came
to iowa or the people who came to mississippi or the people came to america. seeking religious freedom. many of them, yes. they also knew what ronald reagan knew. religious freedom and religious -- religious freedom and political freedom are intertwined with economic freedom. [applause] with the power to make our own decisions, to have a country where anywhere anybody can make the most of their god-given talents and there will be a reward for that in a market oriented capitalistic system. that system has created more wealth more opportunity a greater, stronger, more powerful country and a culture that had
never been imagined before in the history of the world. it was created right here in america. an exceedingly exceptional country. i wish we had some people in this administration who had signed the front side of a paycheck in their lives. [applause] some people who understand it is the private sector that creates wealth. the government has no money except what it takes from the taxpayers. we need taxpayers to have the opportunity. they do not need the government elite in washington to tell them what to do. this administration to often
thinks we are too stupid to take care of our -- too often thinks we ought to banks to bid to take care of ourselves. they need -- this gov administration thinks we are too stupid to take care of our citizens. i am grateful for your being here and for having the chance to say to you that we need to make sure our children and grandchildren inherits the same country we inherited. that is what this election will be about. thank you very much. [applause]
>> thank you haley barbour. let me introduce you to the former lieutenant governor of new york. in 1993, she read the 1362 lapage clinton health care bill. -- 1362 page clinton health care bill. she can tell us what is in the obama health care law. she has led the drive to end the law. she has taught constitutional history at columbia university and has written two books on the history of the u.s. constitution. she is passionate in her commitment to the constitution and its pro growth. ladies and gentlemen betsy
mccoy. >> thank you. you know what this is. i am so glad to be with you today. we are in the fight of our lives. this obama health law shreds our constitutional rights. it forces you to enroll in and one size fits all government designed health plan with you what it or not whether you can afford it or not. it broadens the powers of the irs to track you down and penalize you if you fail to comply. there is nothing in the united states constitution that permits this. even worse for the first time in history, this law gives the federal government the power to
dictate how doctors treat privately insured patients. even if you are in the big health-care plans the government is still in charge of your care. section 1311 right here says health insurance plans can only pay those doctors who obey whatever the secretary of health and human services dictates in the name of improving quality. that covers everything in medicine whether your cardiologists recommends a bypass or a stent whether you're gynecologists recommends a cesarean -- whether your gynecologist recommends a cesarean section. your doctor will have to choose between doing what is right for you and stay in the government's
good graces. it is wrong. you said it. it is wrong. the president has promised to solve the problem of the uninsured by making health insurance more affordable. you have already gotten your premium hikes in the mail. how does he do it? he expands medicaid to 85 million people putting all those uninsured in medicaid. how is it paid for? i.e. eviscerating medicare. listen to this. he pays -- by the eviscerating medicare. listen to this. he pays for it with new taxes. they are floating the idea of another tax. the v.a.t.
the banishing america attacks. in addition to all the taxes this law expands medicaid to 85 million people by the eviscerating medicare. it is like robbing peter to pay paul all the it is robbing bram ought to pay bram paul. -- grandma to pay grandpa. the numbers do not add up. it will mean fewer hip replacements fewer knee replacements fewer cataract surgeries, fewer bypass surgery. those are the procedures that have virtually transformed the experience of aging. there was a time when older people who suffer from arthritis
were so crippled they were trapped in wheel chairs. if they had clogged arteries, they were stuck in a nursing home to out of breath -- too out of breath to get around. the chief actuary of medicare warns that the cuts to medicare are so severe that some hospitals will stop taking medicare. where will seniors go when their hospitals stop taking medicare. ? in summary, this law lowers your standard of care. but government in charge of your care. -- it puts government in charge of your care. it takes away something more precious your liberty. to halt this attack, we have moved the battlefront to three new places.
the state capital the federal courts the house of representatives. 28 states, a majority of states in the united states are challenging the constitutionality of this law. [applause] 28. and more states are coming on every month. every state challenge to the constitutionality of this law has won so far, every single one. these states are heading to a constitutional showdown in the united states supreme court with a decision before the 2012 presidential election and with the u.s. constitution on our side. freedom will prevail. oh yes it will. [applause] at the same time, the house of representatives has already voted to repeal this law.
[applause] yes. now they are proceeding to starve this beast def,undinguningding denying it the appropriations needed. i have to compliment congressman steve cain. he is leading this effort even when some of the republican leaders in congress have wobbly knees. he is standing strong. yes, he is. [applause] all the while however, the alabama -- the obama administration is handing out waivers to certain companies and certain unions exempting them from being law that the rest of us are forced to obey 1040
waivers to date. these waivers are more dangerous than anything in this health law. a government with the power to award a waiver has the power to deny a waiver and destroy a business. what is your competitor gets a waiver and you do not? -- what if your competitor gets a waiver and you do not? no one has to slither to the white house to get a waiver. the rule of law is king. not mr. obama. that is right. if you do not have a high paid lobbyist in washington, or a fast track to be president i would like to request your waiver for you. please come see me at the conference or come to defend your health care --
defendyourhealthcare.us to sign up for your waiver. all of america once a waiver. that is right. [applause] there is a better way. congress should have taken this 2700 page lot and stuff it into the paper shredder and given us a 20 page bill -- page law and stuffed it into the paper shredder and given us a 20 page bill. the framers of our great united states constitution established the united states government in 18 pages. 20 pages to fix what is broken and leave the rest alone. let me correct that and say leave the best alone.
if you are seriously ill the best place to be is in the united states. a woman diagnosed with breast cancer in the united states has over a 90% chance of surviving it. in europe, her chances are less than 80%. that means she is twice as likely to die. a man diagnosed with prostate cancer in the united states has a 99% chance of surviving it. it is not a death sentence here. in europe, one out of four men diagnosed with prostate cancer dies from it. if someone in your family has something we can recall an incurable disease this is the nation of hope -- have something we call an incurable disease this is the nation of hope. this country has onewon more nobel
prizes for health than any other country. there is another battle we have to win, the battle against big government. the more government spends, the less we have to spend on our own families. we used to call politician's public servants. they are making us into the service. -- we used to call politicians public servants. they are making us into the serpents. the government is taking 42% of -- they are making us into the surf bands -- into the servants. only one other time was the 40% line ever crossed and that was in world war ii when we were engaged in a war for our survival. nothing justifies that kind of
use of the fruits of our labor today. [applause] you play an important role in deciding about the nation's leaders. every candidate insists that he plays help keep total government spending below the 40% mark. if they cannot remember that number 40%, tell them to write it on their pomalm. [laughter] the president has said he has pared his budget to the bone. i have read his budget. that is a lie. he increases or rent a 50% over the next five years including an increase -- he increases foreign aid to 50% over the next
five years. our money is going to prop up dictatorships all around the world. we need that money right here at home. the span of pollock's in congress are pushing spending up to levels, in european countries. let's remind them that we do not want to be -- congress is pushing spending up to levels in like in europe. let's remind them we do not want to be europeanized. the white house is under the control of people who do not
share our constitutional values or value our freedom. we have a president who bows to foreign leaders and apologizes for american greatness. he consults the arab league and the united nations, but not the u.s. congress before military action. think about that. he is turning the rule of law into rule by waivers and cronyism. he is disregarding the limits on government embedded in the greatest document written in the history of mankind, the u.s. constitution. [applause] we republicans need to rein in government spending. we need to defeat this onerous health law. we need to end foreign aid.
we need to decrease our dependence on foreign energy sources. does that make us the party of no? absolutely not. we are the party of growth. we are growing economic opportunity. we are growing the future of america. [applause] all of us here today need to recommit ourselves to taking back our government and securing our constitutional liberties before they are lost forever. this is the fight of our lifetime. let's get to work. thank you. thank you so much. [applause] we are going to defeat this law. thank you. thank you so much.
thank you. see you this afternoon. >> and now for our next speaker. you may be familiar with him. he wantwon a congressional seat in georgia. he became known as the architect for the contract with america. document led to the takeover of the house. it elevated newt gingrich to the speaker of the house. he has authored 23 books including 13 new york times bestsellers including ronald reagan's ron debut with destiny and stopping the socialist machine -- ronald reagan's
roendezvous with destiny as stopping the socialist machine. he has an organization dedicated to restoring america's judeo-christian heritage by promoting free enterprise. he is a senior fellow at the american enterprise institute a distinguished visiting fellow at the hoover institute at a news and political analyst for the fox news channel. ladies and gentlemen, speaker newt gingrich. [applause] >> first of all, it is great to
be here. i am proud of what steve king has done in bringing this together. i am proud of what steve king is doing in washington to defund and stop obamacare, where he is playing a major leadership role. i am glad to be back. i will probably reinforce for steve that what he is doing is really important. we have to draw the line in the sand this year. we have to stop obamacare from being implemented this year. this is a major step toward a washington controlled, bureaucratically defined america in which some bureaucrat tells you what you can do. if you go to health transformation.net you will see that there is a big poster that
you can get and download for free. it has 1968 specific grants of power to the secretary of health and human services and other washington bureaucrat in obamacare. you look at that list and say to yourself is there anybody in this room who honestly believes that the federal bureaucracy can implement that level of detail control over your health care, including what the secretary of human services shall define as the characteristics of measuring your teeth for oral care. i spoke to an orthodontist and said how many of you believe secretary sebelius has the knowledge to define the to coverage of oral care. they broke up laughing. it is not a laughing matter. steve king understands that. he is turning up the heat in washington.
i hope all of you will continue encouraging them to do that. i hope you will listen to him and all his leadership on this important issue. [applause] we are delighted to be back here. she spent four years getting to know i will winters better. she is from western wisconsin so she thought of it as going south for the winter. i am optimistic. i believe that in 2012, we could win an historic election and we could end the 80 year dominance of the left and fundamentally recent this country back to a center-right government reflecting the core values of the american people. [applause]
i think there are three large topics on which we can recent america. the first is values. this is truly a center right country, not a left wing country. the second is the economy. this is a country that favors jobs paychecks, and economic growth. the third is economic -- is national security. gallup asked the question, do you believe that the constitution and the declaration of independence make america an exceptional country or do you believe we are a normal country? 80byby 80 to 18, the american people said we are an exceptional country. the 18 includes many of our
bureaucrats, many of our news media. the fight we are in, where we outnumber them better than 4 to 1 is to say we actually mean it. to say that every class k-12 and every tax paid college and university should teach the declaration of independence -- [applause] i do not care what the aclu says they should teach it accurately and they should explain what the founding fathers meant by saying "we hold these truths" -- not philosophies or ideologies -- "
to be self-evident and we are in doubt by our creator with certain inalienable rights." some say we should stay away from values and stay away from social issues. if you do not start with values or start by establishing who we are as americans, the rest of it does not matter. life is not just about money. [applause] second, we have to talk about the economy. it's a matter of values. america works when americans are working. america works when you can provide for your family. i want to create wealth so that every american has a chance for a better future. they are being productive and engaged in useful work. they are doing something that is meaningful for them. we have to get this economy growing again.
we have to focus on cutting spending in washington, getting power back out of washington, controlling the bureaucrats who are trying to control us, and making it desirable and successful to invest and create jobs in america so that we can have a better future. the president in brazil got it exactly backward. present obama goes to brazil and says to brazilians, i am glad you are drilling for oil offshore. then he says, i hope we can be your customer. that is exactly backwards. i want us to create american energy in america. i want resilience to be our customers. -- i want the people of brazil to be our customers. [applause] the obama economic model is borrow money from the chinese and give it to the brazilians.
our model ought to be and that in america create american jobs -- our model ought to be create american jobs and sell products to the chinese bid is the opposite of the model of obama. -- create american jobs and sell products to the chinese. it is the opposite model of obama. i help to balance the american budget for four straight years. -- i helped to balance the budgets for four straight years. this shocked so many people in washington. we quit spending. it is amazing how much that to you get to a balanced budget he quit spending. we had the slowest increase in modern times.
the four years i was speaker we did not raise taxes. we cut taxes. we had the largest capital gains tax in american history. we wanted to put people back to work. we designed tax cuts that made it possible to create businesses. if you want to balance this federal budget, the north 1 onenumbernumber thing thing you can do is have people back to work so they are not getting food stamp or unemployment or medicaid. the difference in spending and revenue in that that is the number one step back to a
balanced budgets. there are things you want the government to stop doing. you can probably disband 2/3 of the department of energy. we would have more energy. [applause] we have to focus on a serious conversation about national security. there were articles last week say i was one way or the other about libya. each day i was on television, i was responding to where the president was that way. there were contradictions because one day he was here and the other day he was over here. they can say i was commenting both ways. that is true. i was trying to follow him up. if you had asked me if we should jump in, i would have said no.
once we jump in the lateke i say to swim as fast as you can. it is not a contradiction if you are already in the lake. on march 3, he said gaddafi has to go. he pitted the prestige and power of the united states against a dictator that has been anti- american for over 40 years. i believe the only rational objective of the current intervention is to defeat gaddafi as rapidly as possible. i would do it by using egyptian jordanian ground forces as advisers with the rebels using all western air power as decisively as power. a no-fly zone does not just mean airplanes. i think this is linguistically
stupid. i have never seen a flying tanks. [laughter] if they want to create a suppressions own to defeat the libyan military, then the honest and say that is what we're doing. it is a totally different process. once you get involved, i believe you get involved decisively. you win quickly and minimize casualties. you get it over quickly. you say you are getting rid of gaddafi because you want his military to get up every morning to the simple message that he is gone. [applause] if you are of the libyan military and wondering if the americans are serious and whether you can hold out -- you watch our white house arguing. i want to say to the things about foreign policy.
we have to risk the lives of young americans. we have to have the courage to tell the truth about who is trying to kill us. it is not a random behavior. it is radical islamists motivated by deep belief against our situation. -- against our civilization. [applause] we need a commander in chief with the courage to tell the truth, not a spectator in chief confused about whether his job is kicking a soccer ball or leading the united states. last week on national security, i am and historian. --lastly on national security, i am and historian. someone explained the unit in nations and arab league. i went back because as a historian, i did not remember this. we were up at independence hall
with the constitution and the declarations of independence. i went back to check. you can do this with your own copy of the constitution. i could not find the arab league anywhere in the constitution. [laughter] i found congress. i found the idea that the president might consult with the united states congress. but to say to americans that he is relying on a collection of dictators called the arab league and a corrupt institution called the united nations -- he did not get around to consulting the congress. that is it fundamentally false model of american government. [applause] people ask how quick you could start turning things around. we are working on a project from the first day.
all of you who have watched inauguration's know that the president goes inside to have lunch with the congressional leadership after the inauguration. what if there was a one hour break in the president went into a room in the capital and signed executive orders that were already discussed and on the internet that had already been drafted by veterans from the reagan and bush administrations? you could do this within minutes to begin turning the government around. the first executive order might be to abolish every bizarre -- czar in the white house as of that minute. [applause] the second executive order might be to reimpose ronald reagan's mexico city policy and abolish any federal money going anywhere in the world to pay for abortion.
[applause] the third executive order might be to reinstitute george w. bush's policy on enforcing the right of conscience and that no government can force you to perform an abortion or any other act against europe religious beliefs. [applause] a fourth executive order might say to the state department that you will allow companies to designate their own capital. the only country in the world where the united states refuses to allow the country to define its own capital is the democracy of israel. it is profoundly wrong to discriminate against the israeli government's right to do that. [applause] imagine that during the campaign next year, there was a web site called ontheveryfirstday.com
where people could submit their ideas. you have enormous capacity to direct things and say what to do or not to. imagine during the year the citizens found things that should be fixed and put them on the web. it would not be a secret. then we would have smart people evaluate them. imagine that by next october of 2012 you had 200 executive orders that smart people all over the country have come up with. there were technically written. on inauguration day, you just have to put them out. everyone would know what was coming. it would be transparent. it would be the sort of thing that obama promised but did not deliver on. [applause]
you could even allow c-span in the room to cover you signing executive orders. you could post on the internet what was done. when i was speaker i used to check off as we did things in the congress. there is a huge difference between obama and the left and 80% of the american people. we can turn it around with remarkable speed if we have courage. you are coming here today and helping steve king is a first step toward that kind of courage. thank you all very, very much. [applause]
>> thank you, speaker gingrich. we're going to move into the first of our two morning panels. it is my pleasure to introduce the panelists for our conversation on transforming america. each brings a unique perspective on how we can dismantle big government and reestablished the relationship between citizens and their government. i would like to introduce marilyn rickert, a proponent of the fair tax. that is an idea that iowans are very familiar with. from maryland, please welcome marilyn rickert. [applause] >> onext up, we were going to have mike george. he could not be here because of a last-minute family issue. we're going to welcome the
executive director of strong america now. he is said u.s. veteran. after serving over 12 years on active duty, he'd joined mike george of the george group serving government clients within the department of defense and other federal agencies helping them to eliminate waste and reduce costs. he holds a degree from the university of tennessee and a master's degree in logistics from the air force university on technology. please welcome peter o. rourke. [applause] next, i would like to welcome greg maraudourad with right to work. greg with right to work has been at the forefront of
protecting workers from compulsory unionism. it is fortunate we have him here today. please welcome greg mourad. our fourth speaker is david bossie from citizens united, a conservative grass-roots organization with 500,000 members and supporters nationwide. citizens united made history last year with their victory of the supreme court. it reinstated first amendment rights for those previously barred from participating in the political process. this victory and leveled the playing field and has been called one of the most important cases in u.s. history. since 2004, he has produced 17 critically acclaimed documentaries including "america at risk" and "rediscovering god
in america." please welcome to iowa mr. david bossie. [applause] this morning, we will hear the five to seven minutes of remarks from each panelist. then we will move into the audience participation question and answers. first up, i would like to welcome to the microphone marilyn rickert. [applause] >> hello, i am here to talk to you today about a topic you not think too much about. liberty and taxation. that seems like an oxymoron. under our current tax system, that is true. i am here to challenge you today about who controls your
life. should it be the government using the tax code to determine what you do or do not buy it or are you in charge of your own life? i am here to talk to you about a fair tax bill. it is h.r. built 25 that will give you control of your own life thatback. said a fair tax passes today. what would be the first thing you would notice? your paycheck would be bigger because there were no longer be federal taxes taken out of your check. imagine that. you would get your check before the government. in america imagine that. your check would be bigger. that is good. the next thing you might notice is what we call our prebate. it is a rebate on what you spend up to the poverty level. you can buy what you need for
your family or yourself to live. you have that money to pay for it. let's say you are going to go to work in the battery is dead in your car. on that day the battery is a necessity for you. you will have the cash in hand to pay your taxes to buy the battery. next month, it might be shoes for the kids. we all have our own emergencies and assessments. it is america. have your your beer. these are things we need to have for liberty. the fair tax is a tax on consumption of the retail level. when you go to buy a new good or
service, you pay your taxes. it will be over. no records to keep. nothing to report to the irs. as a matter of fact, the irs is undegone under our tax code. [applause] we figured the states are perfectly capable of collecting any kind of consumption or sales tax. we do not need the irs. they do not need to know your business. they will no longer know who you work for, how much money you make, how much you spend on the doctor bills. it is none of their business. you go make a purchase and pay your taxes. it is over. there are some people who complain about this. there are people who feel the government should run your life, that you would not make the best
choices for yourself. these are the people that like the income tax basically. under the fair tax, you can decide what you are going to buy this day. if you buy a big new fancy car you are going to pay a lot of fair tax. if you buy a normal car like most of us or a used car, there is no fair tax. the rate on the fair tax is 15% the covers all income tax capital gains all the things to consider income taxes. 8% covers medicare and social security. for most people, they would be paying less in taxes. more people would be paying the tax. for example you may be up until midnight on april 14 tried to get your tax forms done.
i do not think your neighborhood drug dealer is trying to fill out his tax forms for what he made on cocaine sales. the same thing with drug runners and pornographers. everybody pays even the foreign visitors to our shores. these are just a few great things about a fair tax. we have a booth in the hallway where we would like to answer all of your questions. congressman king is a co- sponsorship of the bill. we're grateful for that. he also has a bill in congress, house joint resolution 60 the amendment to repeal the 16th amendment that would make the irs and income tax go away for good. [applause] >> thank you, maryland. we're happy to welcome peter
o'roarke a last-minute change. >> i offer my apologies for mike george wanted to be here this morning. he got called to family issues. you get me this morning. i want to talk to you about an issue we all recognize as part of our debate right now on the news and most politicians. that is our debt and deficit. it is a significant issue as we talk of raising the debt ceiling and other things. it is one thing we have to address now. strong america now is trying to raise awareness on solutions to our deficit, annual spending rate, and bring a reasonable approach to that into the debate. that is why we're here in iowa
and other states to talk to folks about what we can do about that strong america now is here in iowa. we are building a grass-roots organization focused on getting volunteers and others to help us get out the message that there is another way, along with cutting programs and other things that need to be addressed that there is another way to address these issues. that is through addressing the issue of waste. we've been talking about fraud waste, and abuse for a long time. that is not what we are talking about. there is waste that we identify with in the federal government that is more systematic. it is frustrating. i have been in the air force and navy. i worked with the army of bit on improving their processes and
effectiveness. each time i would find examples where the growth of the organization or mission would have wasteful activities start to appear. we would find that at a minimum, 25% of the work they would do was waste. it did not contribute to what they were trying to get done. with the military, that is a big deal. think about soldiers sailors or marines during -- spending 25% of their time doing things that did not help them get where they needed to go. we have a lot of success working on key programs, helping them to reduce costs. we would usually come in to help them improve their effectiveness. we found we were actually helping them reduce the time and money to get things done.
if you remember early on in the iraq war and in afghanistan, we had a problem with improvised explosive devices. pretty nasty not a great thing to be around if you are over there. they've taken a lot of lives. it was a serious problem for the pentagon to address that. we had the mine resistant protected vehicles. they were very effective. the only problem we had was getting that out to the field. we had a group in the navy working on producing those. unfortunately, they were only able to get about five produced per day and then a shift over. that was not going to make the production rates we needed. the navy asked a group of waste reduction experts to go in and
help that group. they did. they were able to raise production up to a least 54 per day. there were able to surge up to about 68 per day in getting those out. that was done. it was a great story. [applause] the really interesting part was that they did this by both the scene -- by focusing on processes. there are able to do it without adding any costs for labor. they were able to get an exponential increase in effectiveness without any new costs. it results in a 9% cost reduction. -- it results in a 90% cost reduction. it shows the idea that can look at government differently and it works. a strong america now, we are trying to convince our elected leaders and those who would like to be elected that this is a
process that they need to seriously and employment at their level. that is what we're doing in iowa. i appreciate your time. we're having folks signed our pledge and building a constituency. if you see one of these the pledge. learn more about strong american now and the waste reduction process. i will take any questions. thank you. [applause] >> i am happy to welcome break ground -- greg mourad from right to work. >> thank you. i am glad to be here. the single most important thing we can do to turn the country around is repealed forced unionism. this is a gathering of
conservatives. whatever issue brought you into this room, your adversaries are funded and staffed by big labor's forced unionism empire. all polling shows that most union members do not agree with the union leadership's politics, but they are forced to pay. the union boss has the ability to force their people to pay. they can force any politics they want. we end up in a position where the unions are electing the people in direct opposition to reward them. we end up with an of spiral in government that is out of control. the national right to work committee is an organization dedicated to one simple principle. everybody has the right to join a union. nobody should ever be forced to join a union as a condition of
employment. the right to choose who will represent your is a fundamental. even convicted criminals get to choose their own advocate. in unionized work force, if you are stuck with the union whether you like it are now -- whether you like it or not. the unions turnaround in demand that people pay for this representation that people did not want or ask for and would get rid of if they could. in the private sector, the facts are dramatic. folks do not want to work in that environment. folks do not want to employ people in that environment. that is quite right to work states consistently outperform other states in most economic measures. -- that is why the right to work states consistently outperform other states in most economic measures. it is far worse when you
unionize the government work force. you create a situation where big later -- big labor is still in becomes most powerful force in politics. they have one driving interest. that is the growth of government because that means growth of their union and dos. they brag about their power to elect their own bosses. you end up in a situation where big labor is on both sides of the bargaining table as the employees and the employer that they just elected. you see an enormous increase in the cost and size of government. eupepsia down a spiral in the quality of service from government. -- you see a down a spiral in the quality of service from government. that is where we are today. some states are on the verge of insolvency. that is mostly because they cannot afford these bloated union contracts that politicians have happily signed off on. the national right to work
committee rights laws in various states -- fights the laws in various states and in the congress. senator demint presented one in the senate recently. we have been in the thick of a lot of exciting battles in the last three months. it has been exciting to see. i have been beating the strum for 15 years. the organization has been here for 50. it has finally caught the attention of the public because of the crisis that government unionism has brought on. we have active efforts to pass laws in maine montana michigan, and half a dozen other states. governors and legislators have begun to see the economic harm and cost to their state of not being a right to work environment. one fellow testified at a
hearing in missouri. he is with a corporate relocation firm. he said half of his manufacturing plants will not consider a non-right to work state when they're looking for places to expand. they write them off immediately. the other half still consider the lack of a right to work as a significant obstacle to be overcome. the benefits to the right to work states are enormous. the national climate in terms of government unionism has changed more dramatically. a few courageous governors and legislators have begun the hard work of rolling back the monopoly bargaining power they have given the government unions and should have never given in the workplace. i would love to see wisconsin continue the effort. what scott walker and the legislature have done has been amazing. that is especially in the face of the ugliest political tantrum
i have seen from by anybody in a generation. i have seen throne by anybody in a generation. [applause] we can compare that to indiana where we believed we were in a position to pass a new right to work state law this year. unfortunately in indiana, the huge pro-the majorities have been stymied by the lack of leadership from the speaker and government. both say they support right to work. both have done everything in their power to move it aside in favor of other things this year. sadly, they have put us in a position where the democrats have been able to leave the state. that has become the single longest legislative walkout in the history of this country.
it is in indiana going on right now and still not over. when they come back, we will continue to press for it. the people of india want this -- indiana want this. if the leadership does not get it they will learn differently. nothing we can do in this country will have a greater impact than passing the right to work clause and rolling back forced unionism, taking away the forced dues pipeline that allows the left to constantly grow the size of government and elect their politicians that against everything everyone in this room believes in. they will not give up the power without a fight. they profited enormously by it. they will not give it up without a really ugly fight. it is going to take leaders with principalles and courage. i hope that we get them.
[applause] thank you. i am happy to introduce our fourth panelist, david bossie from citizens united. [applause] >> thank you all for coming. i felt like making a joke that i needed to announce for president, but i figured that you and i would get that all of the time. -- but i figured that you all in iowa get that all the time. first of all, i want to thank steve king for putting on this important conference so that iowans can hear from the person is going to defeat barack obama in 2012. [applause] congressman king is a true
conservative, principled leader in washington, d.c. believe me, if congress was filled with more people like steve king, this country would be a lot better off. [applause] after citizens united historic victory at the supreme court barack obama nancy pelosi, harry reid, and the liberal media attack the citizens united decision at every turn and viciously so. our important victory empowered voters by giving them additional information. that is what this was all about. in 2010 midterm elections, the results of getting more information or evidence -- were
evident. the citizens united decision was a liberal incumbents's nightmare. no longer do the unions and the george soros'of the world control of zero of the media -- control all of the media and message. it was a huge victory. it came down and stand down from that ycitizens united decision. i do not think after a year of being attacked, anybody really understands what it was about. citizens united produced a film in 2007 called "hilary the movie." when we made the film, we went to the federal election
commission because people like michael morore and the left-wing hollywood elite make films attacking conservatives day in and day out. that is the cultural war we are in. we decided to take on michael moore and provide conservative content through film. and went to the federal election commission and said that michael moore can do this, can we? they said no. we got into this back-and-forth about why. finally, they said "we are in charge. you are a political organization and know what you are doing. we will charge you." mccain-fine geingold is the ruling lot of finance.
it did not just make civil penalties. it made criminal penalties. they told us if we move forward advertising our film, i would be charged and could go to prison for five years per count for making a movie. i thought we lived in the united states and they were joking. . i said i would not play their silly games. i have always been very forward- leaning and believed to greet the believed the greatest defense was a good offense. i did not wait for them to sue me. i see them. -- i sued them.
[applause] i was not being defensive. i took the fight to them. i could not believe that the campaign finance law could prohibit us from promoting our film. if the law was that broad what could the government cannot restrict us from doing? that was my question. we took them to court. at the supreme court during oral arguments, the solicitor general -- the deputy solicitor general of the united states representing the government and obama administration said in open court that the government to ban -- could ban books. at first i said that i thought i had just won the case.
i thought five of them would not believe that book burning was something we do in america. i went through the process. i could not believe that they did this. i said the core of my argument has always been that the government was restricting our first amendment rights. obviously we all know now a year later that we won in the five justices sided with us. i thought we 1won and it would be over. a week later was the state of the union address. barack obama becomes unhinged. it was fun to watch. i had never seen anything like that before. i had never seen the pack of jackals, the leaders of the house and senate, standing up and during -- jeering the
supreme court. it was a shameful moment. justice alito voted with us. that does not make them bad guys. they attacked them viciously and demonized them. you have chuck schumer standing over their shoulders jeering at the supreme court. it was a shameful moment, but it goes to what they've are about. the want civil discourse on one side unless they do not agree with you on the other. then they want to break your head. it is a remarkable thing to live through. the liberals in congress knew from our decision that the clock was ticking. they understood the danger that
their socialist agenda was in. they went for new legislation immediately to try to offset the citizens united decision. the house and senate leaders came up with the disclose thatact. smoking was a leader in opposing that. it is deceptively named. -- congressman king was a leader in opposing that. it is deceptively named. thankfully, the legislation failed and so did the democrats. the left did not focus on the real issues like jobs, the economy, and our unbelievably crushing debt. instead, they played these political games. the american people washed them
away. it was an amazing thing to watch on election night. i did not know we would be able to take over the house. i was around in 1994 when we took a house. you could see that coming for a little bit of time because of the way newt, tom delay and dick armey had been laying the groundwork to do it for years. this was an amazing moment. the american people stood up and said we're taking our country back. i like to quote ronald reagan when he was fighting the soviet union. he had one philosophy. we win you lose. [applause] boy, don't we wish we had a guy like him around today?
newt said reagan was a spectator in chief. -- said obama was a spectator in chief. on libya, president obama is traveling to south america. he is filling out his college basketball brackets but he is not leading. i said maybe hillary clinton was right when she had the 3:00 a.m. phone call. i said that the phone was still ringing. haley barbour said that was an interesting point. hillary clinton pointed out that being a community organizer before you are a state senator in the most corrupt state in the country -- maybe it is not the way to breed presidents. that background does not
necessarily predict world leadership -- beget world leadership. i think we are unfortunately seen that to our own detriment. president obama loves his nobel peace prize and all of the european accolades. at the end of the day, he house to remember he is the president of the united states and not the prime minister of france or the head of the arab league. president obama, in my opinion does not believe in american exceptionalism. we are without question the greatest nation this world has ever known. [applause] we are what president reagan said we are reaching that shining city on a hill -- we are with president reagan said we are -- that shining city on a
hill. president obama went on his world apology to ourur. he goes to europe and cairo to try to convince the world leaders that he is different than that bad guy president bush. he is trying to convince everybody that they like me. we see how that is working out for us. the aimless state of affairs of our foreign policy is truly deadly. his failures in iran and yemen are catastrophic. turning our greatest allies israel into not so much of an alliedy. is putting us all in grave danger. that is why we're here today.
one of the most important things said recently was by the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff mike mullen. he said our gravest threat to our country is our debt. the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said our unsustainable $14.2 trillion is our greatest adversary. that is the head of the military making a statement like the. it is very telling. it is almost as telling as secretary gates saying about libya that we've never done anything like this on the fly
before. i am sorry. libya has been our enemy for 25 years. why is this being done on the fly? this is an administration without adult leadership, without principles, without any vision of what america is about. let's talk about our sprawling debt. i call it the secret entitlement program that the obama administration does not want to talk about. the entitlement program does not deal with medicare or medicaid. it does not deal with social security. it has one function. that is to pay interest to the foreign governments that bankroll our debt. according to president obama is on budget figures -- president obama's own budget features, the
debt will quadruple $770 billion in 2020. that is just the interest on the debt. that is the interest on the debt each year. that will become $2,500 for every man woman, and child in the united states just to service the debt for a year. those are scary numbers. that is the equivalent of people with huge credit card bills. we've all been there. you are trying to pay it down. you get caught in a cycle because you are only paying interest. you cannot give the principale down. you cannot run a family well like that for more than a short time. you definitely cannot run a
country that way. you have to remember that the $770 billion in 2020 that his own numbers are projecting for the debt service only pays down the interest. it does not even touched the principal. that is the and sustainability of it all. that is the unsustainable problem we are in and heading for. that is why i am so grateful to congressman king for holding these events. it is vital that we hear from the people who are going to be able to take him on. i am the father of four kids. i am desperately worried that i am going to leave a nation that is not as great and well off as
we found it, as our parents gave to us. that is a tragedy. it is a tragedy not because we are not working hard. we're all providing for our families. we're paying our taxes. we're working to make a living and making ends meet. it is the irresponsible and unconscionable out of control spending in washington. by the way, it continues. we have to hold -- that is why i love congressman king. he and a few others have the courage to stand up to our own leadership to say that we did not come here to continue the problem. we're not kicking the can down the road. we're dealing with it now. we may not have a choice later.
these are great problems we have today. it is march of 2011. it feels like march of 1979 to me. when jimmy carter was president our american shiftp was adrift and our captain was awol. food prices are skyrocketing and the unemployment rate is stagnant to say the least. america feels like it is in a rut like when jimmy carter was president. it is because of barack obama. i feel like we're going to share a malaise speech coming on. america is ready for new leadership. america is ready for a president that will lead our country and inspire our fellow countrymen.
i think in 2012, rees oal changes coming. thank you all very much. [applause] >> you have all been sitting there patiently. you look like you have something to say. we will move into the audience participation part of the program. we will have two of our staffers with microphones. please raise your hand if you have a question. if you do have a question, please address it to a specific panelist or identify it for everybody to answer. we will allow about 20 minutes for questions and answers. i will leave it to kathy and scott to tell me where we're going. please speak clearly into the microphone. >> ms. rickert could you
explain more about the rebate with the fair tax and what the numbers would be? >> the prebate is a rebate of what you spend up to the poverty level. it is only for citizens and legal residents. if you are a visitor or illegal alien, you would not be eligible for the prebate. the health and human services every year puts out the poverty level. by definition, it is what it costs to buy the necessities of life for your family size. we would rebate that much at the beginning of each month so you would have the money to pay that. it is dependent upon family size, how many adults and children in the family. we do make a slight adjustment. with the poverty level, there is
a marriage penalty. we have adjusted the prebate to eliminate the marriage penalty. you can buy your necessities and supplies tax-free. you can decide your necessities without the government telling you what they think the necessities are. >> i would like to address this to marlyn and david. newt referenced reaganomics. it was a 25% cut oacross the board on taxes. nobody will bring the fair tax to the floor for debate. it cuts taxes 100% across the board. it makes it permanent by eliminating the 16th amendment. what politician could say that
is wrong? >> in my opinion, not enough politicians have enough backbone to support it. that is one of the big problems. [applause] we have too many politicians and lobbyists and so forth making tons of money off the tax code. we have to make sure that our voices have been heard, not just lobbyists who can write big checks. hopefully with your help and you calling your congressmen and senators and anybody else you can think of ask them to support a fair tax, h.r. 25. >> any other questions?
>> how does this work with business expenses? does it mean that you still have to file returns? >> for the prebate you only have to file a postcard of the beginning of the year telling them the size of your family and where to send the money. that is all it takes for the prebate. it will make america the tax haven of the world for business. you may have heard about ge this morning were big businesses can buy tax loopholes for themselves while small businesses are stuck playing heavy taxes. the compliance costs are high to even file your taxes.
it is a huge burden, especially on small businesses. in the end, if you pay the tax on small businesses. you pay the compliance cost. you pay either in the form of higher prices, lower wages, in your retirement account. your stock is worth less. you are paying for it all. we stop the games. you are only responsible for own taxes on what you purchase. >> i have a fair tax question. i consider myself to be a proponent. how do you keep 22% -- god forbid we lose the house and it is 35%. >> the constitution does give
congress the ability to set whatever tax rate they want. there are certain things in the tax code. class warfare is dead. the government no longer picks winners or losers were they reward their friends and punish their enemies. if they raise the tax, they raise it on 100% of the american people. that makes it really difficult. i had one congressman who said it means they can never raise taxes again. well not unless you have a really good reason. >> my question is for peter and perhaps greg. i am a state senator here in iowa. we are a right to work state. i am glad of that. our house passed a bill that
dealt with union negotiations. it was dead on arrival in our senate. inhow can we make a leaner state government when we do have such strong public unions? how can you work around theat to make a more efficient state government? >> beea lot of the manufacturing depots that do a lot of our work are all unionized. even in the private sector when you go to introduce something like waste reduction to an organization, the initial reaction is that this is an attack on jobs and a union. that seems to get over, as you work with them to understand the overall goals. in the federal government, i
have not seen any reduction in jobs. i have seen a reduction of wages. i have not seen a cut in removing jobs out of the work force. we have been able to work with the unions to give them to understand the overall strategy and get them on board. when you have an environment with a strong union, you have to get them on board quickly and have them understand it is not about them. on the federal government side, it is dealing with an under- capability they may have. it is about generating new capability there. we have found it to be fairly successful. you have to work with them. >> long term, your fundamental problem of the unionized government work force has not gone away. you need to begin dealing with that problem. the monopoly bargaining system
was designed for the private sector. market forces are in play to keep demands reasonable. in the government sector, it is hard to drive the government out of business or drive the jobs offshore. nothing is held in to check especially when they are electing their own bosses. you need to be in a position where your public realizes the monopoly bargaining system does not fit the government sector. they are organizing against the general public. there is not some mean-spirited employer with a profit motive. they're organizing against the tax payers. when franklin roosevelt created the national act even he thought unionizing the government sector was unthinkable. even as late as the 1970's, union leadership thought it would never work. we need to get back to a place where people understand unionizing the government is a recipe for disaster.
[applause] >> my question is for everybody. my name is jason seaton. i have been vice chair of the republican committee in florida. i have been as involved as i can with my schedule going on. when i get asked every time what we can do, that is the main thing i would like to know. what can we do? we have a government that spends an hour i -- that spits in our eye while stomping on the constitution. it was clear we did not want obamacare but we got it. it is clear we do not want these things they're shoving down our
throats, but we're getting it. what will give us a tangible results? how can we say that we are in charge, start doing what you are supposed to be doing? even now we won the election in november and cannot get done what we need to do. what can we do as joe public? how can we do something? [applause] . .
the hill and also folks running for afse and say look, this is a significant issue. you need to pay attention. you need to have a solution that's great to articulate the problem but if you don't come forward with a solution doesn't help us. it gets us excited but it doesn't show some real movement. so that's what we're trying to support with our effort and through those means. [applause] >> well, the fair tax movement is a grass roots movement. we're all volunteers. we get to show up at great places like this and talk to you about the fair tax. we are well organized. if you want to learn more information about the fair tax you can go to our informational site at fair tax.org. if you decide that this is a good plan and you want to get involved, you can go to fair tax nation.com. that's where we organize to attend events like this. we do events of our own we
have meetings. and so people say we plan, others say we plot. the choice is yours. >> great question. >> greg, there's about 20-some states that are right to work states. >> 22. >> nearly half. how long has it been since there's been a state go right to work and what's down the road that's likely? and which ones? >> sure. oklahoma was the last one and they passed their law in 2001. it was held up in the courts for a couple of years but functioning since 2003 and had dramatic impacts from oklahoma's economy. they went last to right near the top of the list very quickly. next on deck, well, we had expected to make indiana the 23rd right to work state. governor daniels has been unhelpful in that effort but we continue to try that. and i still think that's the most likely state next.
however, there are a number of very exciting opportunities. missouri has got a right to work bill now with leadership in the senate and the house that is interested in it. there's a governor there that will veto and i don't think we can override. we'll see. but in the end if the governor is forced to veto it that becomes an issue in the next race and that possibly be in a position where we're elected to replace a bad politician with a good one or replacing a bad one to go good. if he learns to vote right or uses his signing 3e7b correctly i'll learn to live with him. we have another one in new hampshire for the first time that i can recall. it's going to the senate next probably in the near future. again, we have a governor that has said he'll veto it and we'll make a run at an override. we'll going to try. and if he vetos it he's going to have to face the consequences. the governor no maine has been
pushing a right to work law. we've got good majorities there and a strock -- strong in-state there. and we could see exciting things. folks in michigan have got a ground swell. nobody expected michigan in terms of right to work but they have been hemorrhaging jobs and folks on the ground in michigan realize that they've got to turn things around and get out from under the thumb of the uaw. so there's exciting things happening on the front. >> thank you. my name is steven and i have a question for greg and peter. what about the repeal of the davis bacon act on the federal basis? and i'm very familiar with the, they have a similar law in the state of missouri which you're addressing and then i have one more question for the fair tax
issue and it's more of an observation. take away the power to right the tax code and you will give the power back to the people. and that is a situation that most people do not understand. and i appreciate your response, sir. >> sure. well prevailing wage is an insidious issue that at the federal level is called davis bacon, most of the states call it per vailing wage and the system is set up theoretically to guarantee a so-called fair wage on government contracts. what it really does is guarantee that they pay the union wage. and along with the uneyg wage come the union work rules which is a much bigger problem. and it's a situation where they base it on this so-called survey of what the wages are being paid for given work. well, the only people that have the resources to deal with actually answering the survey and going through that paper
work and tracking it is the unions. everybody else the nonunion contractors are just trying to make money and actually do their work. so you end up with a situation where union elected bureaucrats are administratoring this system that basically forces anybody doing government contracting work to live by the union rules. and it's not about the wages. it's about the work rules. the wages aren't that much better. often they're worse. the problem is when you're in a unionized contract environment you've got one guy that's allowed to do this thing and not that thing he's allowed to dig a ditch but not empty a trash can. it's crazy the lack of flexibility. and that's what the real cost is. so prevailing wage laws are a disaster. they make everything that government does more expensive and they do nothing to ensure labor peace which is what they theoretically impose it for.
the history of the prevailing wage laws is really interesting. all the laws ornlly were introduced to stop minorities from moving up into the north and taking white jobs away. that's where they came from. that's the history there. it was the unions trying to protect themselves from nonunion workers. it's a vile system. >> i was going to say i agree. and what we've seen when we've worked with government agencies and one that is are highly unionized and have work rules is that that flexibility that drive or that lack of flexibility that drives that cost is very apparent. so what we've been able to find is once we've been able to show that and how that inflexibility affects the cost of government, that wage that we would call that waste doesn't have any constituency at that point. everybody agrees or most everybody agrees. and certainly the folks having to pay that cost or do those
appropriation agree that we need to do something about that. so what we found is that really proves to not just the folks that are advocating for the union side or the management side that a change needs to happen. and we believe in the federal government, a fundamental change needs to happen on how we approach those issues. >> just addressing the fair tax issue for one second. it's true the founding fathers were smart enough. they did not allow an income tax in the original constitution. it took the 16th amendment to burden us with that kind of tax. and we have the power to remove it. it's up to us. >> and these will be our final two questions. >> yes. question is for marilyn. the question is right now we do enjoy the tax deductible contributions. how does fair tax handle that
situation? >> this is a good one because this is what they're going to scare you with. a deduction is only good when you're taxed. if you're not taxed on something, you don't need a deduction. you make your house payment 100 tax free. you don't need a home mortgage deduction. your gift to crour church or your nonprofit organization is 100% tax free. you don't need a deduction. these are all just part of the games that they're playing with you and we want the games to stop. [applause] >> this will be our final question. >> this is a general question for the panel. i'm vern. i was a republican candidate in the last presidential election in iowa and new hampshire. i visited 140 towns in iowa and 100 in new hampshire placed tenth in both. i went to what they call an
extreme long shot. my question for the panel is, and this is a general question, the military and the catholic church have each existed across thousands of years in different cultures with about a dozen levels from priest to pope and private to general. how can we in some creative way reduce the level of bureaucracy in our government which until that happens nothing intelligent will probably happen? >> i think i've already answer that had question a couple of times. the first thing you've got to do is get rid of the monopoly bargaining system within the government and the government workforce b. you do that, you cannot make any other changes because it's all controlled by the union contracts which gives the unions all the extra power as opposed to all the rest of the citizens who ought to be through their elected legislative leaders dictating what the government spends its money on and what it spends its
money on. instead, we've got a situation where the unekwln sits across and the two of them cook up the plan for what's going to be spent and what those bureaucrats are going to do. it's not democracy to give one particular voice that much power as opposed to all the rest of us. >> i would agree with the premise there. spent a considerable amount of my career within the military and working for a lot of those folks, you do seem to have several different folks doing the same a lot of redundancy, a lot of waste. i believe, if we don't fundamentally change the way we kind of view that working with the other issues that we've got going on there and address some of these issues of efficiency, i mean, there's really a lot of excuses made why we don't have that coming from my environment as always we have to have redundancy. have you ever seen any military airplane, that's why you have
two different kinds of engines which seems to be a popular issue right now. it's always under the guise of we have to have redundancy, we have to have so much more than we actually may need because there may be a contingency. in some cases that's true. in most cases it's not. especially on the business side of the federal government. we do a lot of things very, with a lot of ignorance. and i say ignorance and not stupidty because what we found in our experience when we work with these folks and revealing these redundancies and this waste, again it doesn't have a constituency. folks are more than willing to reduce that. they just have to be led there and pushed there. and that's why we're asking for this to become a national issue driven out of a more executive side to drive this through all these agencies and force them to change the way they operate and not just kind of spend every dime they're given spend and then come up with new things for them to do to justify their existence.
if they're providing a good service, provide the good service as cheaply as you can. if you're not stop. and don't spend that money. that's really where we're coming from. >> well, there are several studies about how much the tax code costs us. anywhere from $350 billion to $500 billion a year is what it costs us to pay the tax. that's not the taxes. that's what it costs to file the forms and regulate the bureaucracy. you know that's like almost half a trillion dollars we're talking real money there. if you want to reduce government, i think that's the best place to start. >> and let's give a warm round of applause to our panel for joining us this morning. [applause]
>> and now i'm excited to introduce our second emsy of the program who will be mo rating the final panel of the conference. i do have one personal request and that is for all the cyclone fans in the room to please be kind and courteous. matt whittaker is a des moines-based lawyer with the law if i remember -- law firm. prior to forming he was president shi appointed united states attorney for the southern district of iowa for more than five years and graduated from the university of 83 three times with a -- yea three times. go hawk ayes. matt whittaker. [applause]
i wore this tie for you. >> thank you. >> well, i should now lead the group in an on iowa fight song. well i want to thank steve king and the conservative principals pac for inviting me here today to be an emsee and spend time with my friends. i see a lot of friendly faces that i haven't seen in a long time and it's good to see we're motivated and interested in the issues that are affecting our state and country, and it's conservatives like yourself that are going to make the difference this time around and it's going to be incremental but it's going to be important. without further adieu it is my honor to introduce our next panelist as we discuss family values and the culture wars. no they're not over. we're still fighting. next up is connie mackie and she is the president of the frc action ak. she worked in the reagan and bush one administrations and also worked on the presidential
campaigns of pat buchanan and gary bower. frc action was founded in 1992 to promote american values and philosophy of the founding fathers concerning the nature of ordered liberty. please welcome connie mackie. [applause] also on the panel is brian brown. president of the national organization for marriage. their advocacy center is tasked with connecting citizens with their officials on important issues on marriage, state and local level issues like here in iowa during the dispute and the resulting retention vote of the iowa supreme court three court justices. ladies and gentlemen, mr. brian brown. preserve innocence a mission of the american principles project, was organized to
promote policies and actions to protect children. as the director of preserve innocence, it is the duty of our next panelist, emmet to not only advance the pro-family agenda but to promote a dedication to the fundamental principles on which our country was founded. please welcome emmet mcguarde. [applause] our fourth panelist hails from colorado where she served in the state house and then six years in the u.s. house of representatives. marilyn muss grave now takes her 100% pro-life record to the susan b antony lift where she is spokes person. and their nearly 300,000 members are cate to electing pro-life women as well as the issues criminal in front of our country from obama care to federal funding aff planned parenthood. please give a warm welcome to
marilyn. [applause] and now i'd like to ask each of the panelists to take about four or five minutes and take the podium from me, and introduce the subject of this panel. thank you. in the order that they were introduced. sorry. >> good morning. it's still morning. isn't it? it's good to be back in iowa as you mentioned i'm not new to this state. i've been out here in 1996 with pat buchanan hoping to inject some personal or i should say conservative principles into that race at that time. i had dinner with pat the other day and we're still pushing for the same things we were pushing for back then. but it's always fun to be out here in iowa during the
presidential primary season. you know, family research council is an organization that really stands for the family and fights for the family that would be on capitol hill as well as in we've started a pac so that we can elect people who care about the family understand the issued and understand what the culture does when it is so affected by big government takeovers of your thoughts, of your speech, of your school, et cetera. so that's what we do at family research council. and i just wanted to quickly comment on governor barber's comment about the main thing is the main thing. now, i'm from the east coast so maybe that makes a lot of sense in mississippi but my problem with the main thing is that i
assumed he's talking about the economy, and we would certainly agree that the economy is in a very dire situation right now and it is format. however, the culture -- foremost. however, the culture cannot be subject tracted from that. it's a complicated issue. and what happens in our culture ambingts the economy and everything around it. so to say as some have said that we call a truce on social issues, we say, not at all. it's all of a piece. [applause] actually, in the last round of 2010 elections we ran an ad, i hope some of you saw it. we ran it around the country called government off our backs with a humerous look at the ways in which our very lives right down to the candy bar you might eat is being attempted to be regulated by particularly
this administration. and it actually won the cbs online poll, the and other awards so we even kith through with the mainstream media with that ad and we hope to do more of this in the upcoming elections. you know, when we talk about the culture and we also believe at family research council that personnel is policy. so while i again agree with governor barber that we must think policy when you're thinking about the next presidential election, i'm not so sure that a lot of people weren't thinking correctly in this country about the person behind the policy and we had a very i think some thought an attractive candidate for the presidency but we didn't realize that acorn was attached to him sol lynn ski was at least by book his mentor and we
are living right now with the tenets of sol lynn ski guiding our government and it is outrageous. [applause] well we have good standup leaders and we brought a lot of them. our pac as well as the work of the people on this panel here and other organizations. we brought a good conservative group to washington and we're certainly hoping that mike pence's bill, i think it's h.r. 127 which defunds planned parenthood. why are we paying our federal tax dollars for an organization that is the lead abortion clinic not only in our country but in the world. [applause] so we're behind mike pence and we're behind a lot of the people that we helped to bring to this conservative house and of course now we have to do what we can do to bring a conserve ti senate.
we're targeting 16 new seats in the next round to try to complete complete the opposition to this sole lynn ski and i refuse to call it anything else. it is the solosinki administration. and we are doing everything we can. we have to fight not only on the federal level but as brian and marilyn and others will tell you, we're having to fight on state election of judges and as was mentioned family research council and nom combined to bring that judge bus out here and i want to make a public thank you to congressman steve king who stood with us through that tour and i'm going to tell you it was rough at times. very rough. [applause] and because he was with us we had over 250 media hits which helped i think to get the message out about liberal
judges and make people who might not be thinking about it understand that when you put liberal judges in place liberal policy is what you are going to get in the end. so it extends now beyond candidates. it extends now even to judges on your state supreme courts. and of course we fight back in d.c. to do what we can. it's very hard when you have a president who is going to put liberals on the federal supreme court but we do what we can to be out there and we are right now running ads in the state of wisconsin because the unions have picked their own candidate to be on the state supreme court there. where again issues like marriage, life and all issues, taxation and everything will come eventually to the court and you won't have a shot at all when the court is stacked. so the battle is wide and the bat sl very very deep.
now, we look forward to the next round family research council does not support in the end one presidential candidate but we fight like mad in the primary to make sure that the candidate that emerges will be one who reflects our concern for families and for a conservative approach to all issues, the economy to life, to funding of -- to defunding abortion, and to changing the mindset of the country in general. we have actually doveped an ad that we hope will influence the next presidential election object issue of life. the president we have now voted three times in his own state against even a born-alive bill. that is a bill where the baby while marked for abortion makes it through the birth canal and
is there to save and yet he voted against a bill to do just that. so we have a president that doesn't reflect the american values. and we'll be doing everything we can in the primary through independent expenditures and well basically through independent expenditures to see that we get the best candidate we possibly can to replace the executive branch we have now. thank you. [applause] >> as connie mentioned it's great for us to be back in iowa. i want to talk a little bit about how i think we're at a defining moment for concervix and how i believe hah this -- conserveityism and how i believe this will reserb vate and have an effect far beyond
our lifetimes in the direction this count vi going. and i want to start with the good news because i like to look at things from the per spective of what we've been able to accomplish. and i want to start by pointing to the good news that you the people of iowa, changed the course of human history just a few short months ago by doing something that the elites said with you going to be impossible. and that is defeating three sitting supreme court justices who refused to do their duty to defend the constitution. [applause] but that is only one example. it's the most recent, it's the most important. but time and time again, we hear from elites, we hear from those ten yurd professors that professor going rich was talking about, we hear from pollssters that somehow the marriage issue is san issue
that is devicive or that fighting and standing for the family is an issue that really isn't what conserve yatism is about. we need only go back to edmund burk writing about our obligations to defend the first little platoon of society to realize that this is what conserve yatism is all about. and it isn't some separate issue disconnected from economics, disconnected from national security, these issues are all connected. if we have a judge who can impose his or her will by making up out of thin air the idea that there is nothing good and beautiful and true about unions of husbands and wives we have a judge that can do just about anything. and if we do not stand up to assert that we are a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, and hold them accountable then that judge is able to basically
rewrite our constitution, not just on the family but on any issue. and again, you the people of iowa stood up and changed history. now, in california we were told by people that were supposed to know better that you will never win a marriage fight in california. this is a liberal democratic state. don't you know? and this is a devicive issue. but what happened? the people of california voted to protect marriage by the same margin that president obama won his presidential victory in california. so don't tell me this is a devicive issue. this is an issue that unites like very few issues do. and the reason i bring all of this up is because we are 31 of 31 public votes on marriage. every single time that people of this country have been allowed to have a free and fair vote, they've voted to protect marriage as the union of a man and a woman. california, maine, iowa. these are all the most recent
examples. so this is the good news. that people are still with us. what's the bad news? well, the bad news is that regardless of all of this evidence, all of the empirical data that shows that the people of this country still understand that marriage is the union of a man and a woman elites many of these democrats, but some republicans, think that somehow we should throw in the towel on marriage issues. and don't be deceived. truce essentially means unilateral disarmament. that's what truce means. the other side is not calling for a truce. they're working in our schools they're working in our legislatures to redefine marriage. we have to stand up and protect it. and so we, the people of this country, have an obligation to make sure that our candidates for president are willing not only to use their lips to say we're going to protect marriage as the union of a man and a woman, but are actually going to go out and lead on this
issue, make forceful arguments. and you the people of iowa have a chance to make that real. when these candidates come through iowa the caucuses, everything, you can hold them accountable. look, we're in a position right now where marriage is under assault in the courts and we have a proposition 8 case currently going before the united states supreme court, working its way to the united states supreme court and a case working its way to the united states supreme court that could force redefinition of marriage throughout the country. and every state victory we have is a lesson to judges to say you are bound to uphold the constitution. and what we do to protect marriage, what we do to say that social conservatives and economic conservatives are not two different groups. we're one and the same and that we're going to stand up for constitutional government, we are not going to allow judges to rewrite the very nature of the family, to
rewrite the constitution, what we do now and what you in iowa do now will decide what 2 future of marriage is in this country and whether our constitution is respected whether our constitution is something that is viewed as real and not just made up by judges, you are going to decide that. so i ask all of you to do what you did in the judicial retention election. hold these candidates accountable. stand up. do not accept the lie that same sex marriage is inevitable. you have already proven them wrong once. prove them wrong again. thank you. [applause] >> good morning. american principles project and american principles in action work to renew america's commitment to its founding principles. we have offices in washington,
d.c. and south carolina, and in january 2010 eric ownerson who is in the back of our room opened our iowa office. since then he has been leading up our effort there. working on social issues including religious freedom parental rights, life, and educational choice. all those issues are tied to our larger reality. and that's this. americans, particularly conservative americans, hold their founding documents and principles at sacred. and because of that, america is an exceptional place. and -- hello.
an exceptional place in which to live. and it is a great blessing to be an american. i do have one particular issue i would like to highlight today. there is an enduring threat against our founding. it is the belief that people should not be making decisions by themselves but that government bureaucrats and elites should make those decisions for them. over the last 20 years that threat has been gaining momentum. that is, until the 2010 elections when the people began to reclaim their founding and to roll back big government takeovers. but the most dangerous big government takeover is just now rising into the consciousness of conservative activists. that's the big government european style takeover of education that is known as the race to tops common core
standards. that program was embedded in the 2009 stimulus bill and it is the greatest threat to liberty in that bill. and perhaps it's a threat as great or greater than the health care takeover. and i've just give you a few highlights of that program. is it on? [applause] now that the rhetoric is over. i want to give you a few highlights of that program. implementation will cost the states billions of dollars. just by way of comparison. massachusetts put in new standards in 1993, between 1993 and 2006 it spent $92 billion implementing those standards.
get your check books out. the federal government strong-armed the states into signing on to the standards. that's nothing new. neither congress nor the state legislatures approved the program. approval was put in the hands by the obama administration of bureaucrats and governors. the program was conceived and directed by the bill gates foundation which also between 2008-2010 provided $35 million to fund and develop the program. it moves the united states toward a european style education system where government decides what trades or professions a particular student can pursue. it's the antitiss sis of american education in which students are educated to be citizen leaders. such as all of you in the room here today. the standards also have
substantive weaknesses. it delays development of students' basic arithmetic skills until grade five. two years behind their peers in high achieving countries. it relies on an unproven approach to geometry, one that russia tried and discarded 25 years ago. many grade english standards require no increase in intellectual demand. 70% of the english curriculum is not based on literature but on informational text. and to quote my colleague eric in the back of the room, that's a perfect vehicle for pushing bias and indoctrination into the schools now or in the future. and it's a drastic deviation from traditional american english curriculum. they're not done yet.
they'll be introducing other sent matters and they'll top it off with american history standards. the program will centralize education content decisions with special interest and centralized bureaucrats. in much the same way the standards themselves were developed. this will make it nearly impossible for parents to effect change when problems arise. furts more, gonans of the standards will be outside the authority of the federal and state governments. the people will have no direct or indirect say in the matter. with the implementtation of the obama health care takeover, government steps in between the doctor-patient relationship. education takesover puts government between the parent-child relationship. i submit to you that's at least as important. the issue then in america is
who should control the shaping of the hearts and minds of our children? should it be centralized government? should it be elites in ivory towers and corporate board rooms? or, should it be as the founders intended, should it be with parents? [applause] no matter how you describe the main thing, i think that has to be part of the main thing. and that's the main thing i'm saying here today. [cheers and applause] >> well, it's really wonderful to be on the panel with these good soldiers in this war. and how wonderful to be with steve king in iowa. you know i got to serve with steve king for six years in congress. and i tell you some conservatives get kind of cranky and they get kind of tired.
but steve king is a happy warrior. he is at his best when the pressure is at the greatest. [applause] my husband almost drove here so we could get to spend time with steve and marilyn king. but i'm with susan b. anthony list now a pro-life organization. and we are all about protecting babies. you know, when you're involved in the life movement around that's what got me into politics to begin with in colorado, it's about one thing. it's about the intrinsic worth of every individual created by god a gift to this world with all their talents and their abilities, and this is reagan ann king. steve and marilyn king's
granddaughter. how about it? god bless that precious little child. that's why i'm in the pro-life movement. because of babies. you know, is there anything better? anything that gives you more hope and joy than a little child. you know, susan b anthony list is named after one of the suffer jeths. and i ask you if you ask a stunte in middle school or high school if they were learning about women voting they wouldn't know that the suffer jeths were pro-life. would they know that? they said that abortion was child murder, they said that women and their children should not be treated as property. how in the world did femenism,
strong women become synonymous with abortion? you know, there is a new role model today. the last election cycle was the year of the pro-life woman. susan b anthony list works in races across the country and there is a new role model for women who want to bh in leadership positions and that is the pro-life woman. we do not have to take the rights away from a baby like reagan ann king to exercise our rights. so there is a new kind of femenism in town. women are in leadership roles. susan b anthony list is standing for life and we know that a woman has an incredibly unique voice on the issue of abortion. you have the barbara boxers of the world saying to a pro-life fan like steve king, well, what do you know about it? you've never been pregnant.
what do you know about this issue? but we are so thankful for our faithful pro-life men in congress like steve king who voted no on the continuing resolution because it contained funding for planned parenthood. he said no that takes courage. and that's the courage we see in congressman king. susan b. anthony list works so hard against obama care and there's so many reasons to hate it. as the lieutenant governor of new york illustrated so appropriately, but susan b anthony lift went after government funding of abortion. don't be see seaved, obama care, health care reform legislation caused the greatest expansion of abortions since row v wade, that dark day row v wade. susan b anthony list has been
fighting that every step of the way. again it was an election issue. amazingly we conservatives all know this. when abortionists talk about in the republican party in the democrat party you get these stoney faces. you know exactly what i mean. just don't talk about it. it's kind of like the truce thing connie. just don't talk about those social issues. but since row v. wade, abortion has not gone away. it has not gone away because we know that laws can either take lives or save lives. so what they do in washington matters. and when they want to take our tax dollars and fund an organization like planned parenthood at the tune of over $360 million a year, to give money to the largest abortion provider in 24 nation, one in four abortions performed by planned parenthood we are saying no. no more of our tax dollars to
planned parenthood. [applause] i was privileged to be on the hill visiting members of congress with lylea rhodes. has anyone seen the videos of planned parenthood and what their workers do from the clinic manager on down? did you see those videos? god bless lylea rose live action and infusion of young people into this pro-life movement. going in there and showing a clinic manager in new jersey, that's the one that comes to mind right now all too willing to aid and abet sex trafficking. all too willing to cover up statutory rape. i mean, it's like a hellish look into a planned parenthood clinic. but around this nation, pro-life people are paying attention. and the presidential candidates had better pay attention.
we care about life. we want more than lip service. and we don't want our tax dollars going to planned parenthood. planned parenthood is a $1 billion a year corporation. can you imagine? paying their executive a six-figure income. and they need our tax dollars? i don't think so. you know, soon there will be yet another opportunity for congress that we have come together at susan b anthony list with other organizations. check us out at expose planned parenthood.com. and we have sent over 1 million phone calls just in the last few days to congress to insist that they defund planned parenthood as we fight in this fight for all the values that we hold dear remember life is the litmus test. there's a huge disconnect in washington, the most pro-abortion president we've ever had while the majority of americans are pro-life the
majority of women are pro-life, more and more young people are pro-life, we are sending a very clear message and i hope you will join us. stand with congressman steve king, susan b anthony list and others, to say not one more penny of our tax dollars for planned parenthood. thank you very much. [applause] >> what a great group. my head must be electric or something. what a great group of culture warriors. we now have some time for questions from the floor. this is a very important part of this conference is to understand the issues and to affect the issues as we head into this next election cycle. so we should have a couple people with microphones. one right here. we'll start here to the right. please address your dwose the panelists and we'll go from
there. >> my name is bill brown and my question relates to all of you kind of a broader question. i think it was announced this week that the hispanic population was now the largest minority population in the u.s. and my experience with hispanics has been that they tend to be very conservative on social issues and there's another group that's always gives me concern because i have a number of kids in this cohort and that is the 20-134gs that seem to -- 20-somethings that seem to be more involved in the dominant culture about how live and let live and not impose moral standards on anything. and what i want to hear from you is how do our conservative groups reach out on the social issues to those two groups and how do we get our message deeper into those which will be a bigger portion of our society
as time moves on? thank you. >> well, just briefly, a t the national organization for marriage we work closely with american and hispanic communities and also interestingly enough it was a hispanic pastor who was the only person in the new york senate who was the only person willing to stand up and defend marriage. no republican stood up to speak before the vote. he stood up and that's why one of the reasons why same sex marriage was defeated 38-24 in the new york senate. just two weeks ago we defeated same sex marriage in maryland. well they'll claim there wasn't a vote. the reason is it had passed the senate it was in the house it was because the african american community rallied and cosponsors of the same sex marriage bill from african american districts came out and said hey, we were cosponsors
but we got so many calls to oppose this that we're now going to oppose it. that's a pretty big deal. [applause] so i think that there is a huge area for conservatives to reach out and grow, especially on social issues. and we're seeing that with the african american community and hispanic community especially on the marriage votes. on the second part of the question, that's a little bleaker. it is true that younger voters have some of the highest support for same sex marriage. but i don't think you should read as much into it as the liberal media wants to. in california you still have 38% of voters between the age of 25 and 18 voting to support marriage as the union between a man and a woman. we have not lost the younger generation. we have work to do. so we have a next generation project which involves a lot of social media work to reach out to them. so that's what we're doing.
>> we have at app we have a project that engages in conservative outreach to latinos. and just to add to the question, they also have the highest incidents of entrepreneurialism in america and they contribute to the armed forces. they participate in the armed forces at among the highest rates. and our belief is that we outreach on the issues. and we think far too often conservatives don't do that and in campaigns just have fluff but don't talk substance. and that i think is at the heart of it to talk substance to talk conservative, to talk about conservative principles,
to talk about our funeding principles. -- founding principals. >> i just want to say that in regard to the youth and young women we really use the social media. we are using everything that young people are really interested in and paying attention to. the infusion of energy and passion with lylea rose and live action is remarkable. we also worked very closely with students for life. and when you can stand for life on a liberal college campus, you get your position really firm and you're going to hang there for the rest of your life i really believe. so we really encourage our college students to speak out. we work closely with them. and i think we're doing thing that is young people are really paying attention to and this definitely is a new day and you had better be with it on all those things. our young people are not even going to know that you exist. so we're working very hard in that area.
>> and if i may. family research council under the direction of our president started a pastor outreach program that reaches deep into the black community in particular and frankly i've been around washington a long time and it has been just a real joy to work with these pastors who are taking the message into their congregations and sort of getting past i think a block that had been there for many years. and that would include the his panic population as well as the black communities. we also have generation next. everyone i think understands that we all need to get up with social media. i will lag behind forever but we have young people who understand it and are involved with us to move it forward. but we saw brian and we were all out there on prop 8 in california and frankly it was the minority communities that brought home the victory we had
there. so we totally understand it. it needs a lot more. but organizations like all of ours up here ubs your point and are working very hard to increase everything we do in those communities. and frankly we have somebody who just won a senate seat from the state of florida named marco rubio. [applause] and i think there may be a deeper move into the hispanic community in 2014. >> thank you. >> could i real quickly i want to address the youth issue. a lot of that disaffection, i think, arises from the education they're getting. it arises from the bias and indoctrination that is going on in the schools and the class rooms. it's not just on social issues.
it's on economic issues. the liberal viewpoint is that humans are not inherently creative. that's the elitist viewpoint is that you have a couple of really creative people in the ivory towers of corporate boardrooms and they're going to tell us what to do and how we should live our lives. and it's different from i know it might be a bad word. it's different from capitalism which the premise is people get together and create things. and they infect our children with this. they infect it through environmentalism, radical environmentalism, that is what looks at the world as a set of finite resources and it means that people have to -- and people who aren't in their view
inherently creative, people have to struggle compete for those resources. it's not an expanding pie which it is in the capitalist mentality. and so this is something that we really have to buckle down on. this is the state that comes in and infects our children with that. and then they grow up and they're all they're well meaning good children but they're thinking about these things all the time and then it shouldn't be any wonder or surprise to us that they start getting disaffected and rebellious. it's just a natural consequence. basically you have the state impozzing values on them and telling them that whatever you hear from your parents is probably wrong on these issues. apb did a report on the iowa
core curriculum last july. it's up on our website, preserve intelligence.org or american principles project.org. but it goes through and it details all the subtleties or not. many of the subtleties in the iowa core curriculum that start infecting students with these thoughts. and it's everything. it's government kind of presents government as levels. you know you can start from the local level and go up to the state level, and then you go to the federal level. kind of isn't really faithful to the constitution. the constitution talks about two sovereign sets of government federal government and state government. but then you go to the federal government and then it talks about united nations.
that's not a government. that's an association at best. >> next question. >> thank you. i would like to start with a personal aside. tonight welcome you back to iowa. >> thank you. >> i joined you in that buchanan and bower campaign cycle. as important as politics has been, as important as the political process is, the legislative process iowa did some wonderful things this last election putting 60 people in the iowa house and coming within about 30 votes of the 25 25 tying the senate and removing chester and three members of the supreme court that were out of touch with reality. the problem that we have is we may win in the political process and still lose in the courts. my question before david left the stage in that last session is there anything on the horizon that would first of all completely take mccain-feingold
when you stack that with judicial activists like they are trying to do in madison wisconsin, and you listen to what was just said about the school curriculum, this has been -- how many year has obama been in? >> too long. >> it has been an assault on every angle you can think of. courts legal cases classrooms. he wanted change. he did not lie about that. >> the national organization for marriage has eight federal lawsuits pending that deal with mccain fine gold and state election laws.
-- mccain-feingold. those who want to redefine america are smart. they have attempted to create a playing field that is completely on even. that largely has to do with the election laws and donor disclosure laws that unfairly punished smaller organizations and create situations in which donors to groups like the national organization for marriage are targeted. our donors are not publicly disclosed. in california, because of the way the state law is, all of the donors to proposition 8 were published -- were publicly disclosed. what happened after proposition 8 past is something i have never seen. there was a wave of licensed hatred against the owners of proposition 8. it was to all religious groups. mormons were targeted.
whatever your religious beliefs are, we are a country where people can stand up for their beliefs. we cannot have a country where religious freedom is attacked by people going after them in their homes. opponents of proposition 8 took the home addresses of all of these donors and put them up on google baps as if to say go and get them. -- google maps, as if to say go and get them. we were deposed and we filed a federal lawsuit to keep our donors private following citizens united. that lawsuit is working its way through the federal courts. it goes back to the same thing. the elites think they know better. they think that our argument -- we do not even have a place at the table. we can be discarded in the same civil rights that we should all share, we do not deserve those same rights and we can be pushed
aside. in maine after the victory we were the largest under. in maine they attempted to come after us using these election laws. we filed federal suits say conservatives cannot be targeted for their religious beliefs. -- saying conservatives cannot be targeted for their religious beliefs. saint who we support can not be abridged. they do not -- saying who will support cannot be a abridged. that is why citizens -- cannot be abridged. you asked a second point about judges. we have two federal suits working toward the supreme court. they could not only overturn proposition 8, but can overturn every lot that has already been
decided. we have to make sure whatever president is elected will nominate constitutionalists to the bench. we need to be prepared to ask candidates that if the supreme court were to will adversely and force same-sex marriage on this country, candidates, folks who are going to congress, have to be prepared to support a federal marriage amendment. that will be the last chance to protect marriage throughout this country if the court were to do this. >> if i may say something as the person who sponsored the federal merits amendment when i was in congress i have to speak up. mccain-feingold was supposed to get big money out of congress. that really worked. all it takes is millionaires to sit down in a room and put a target on you.
they do not even go after you on the issue of marriage. they have something like you do not support the military, or whatever. we have to be shrewd. quite frankly we have to emulate the brilliance of the left when they use these tools that are not available because of mccain-feingold to advance our cause is. it is an amazing thing to see the brilliance. they are just as brilliant as they are vicious in the political arena. they have been successful with the tools available to them. when we get into a room like this and we are people who hold particular values dear, you have to have heroes elected officials who are willing to speak out on our issues. if the last puts a target on our
heroes that dear to defend -- dare to defend life and marriage there will not be many who will do it. they are taught a lesson. we have to stand with our elected officials who have the courage to speak out on our issues. i am a big david barton and. fan. he said the judicial branch should be the weaker branch. what has happened to? now we see the judicial branch being the most powerful. we need legislators who say we make the laws, not the courts. [applause] >> this is to the congresswoman. i am the executive director and founder of teenage offenders. we are a youth or life
organization. the former director of planned parenthood now turned pro life confirmed that what we see in the live action and videos is protocol across the entire council -- across the entire country. i do sidewalk counseling. planned parenthood has to be defunded. we passed the 10th amendment in the house. we are focused on the senate. the senators do not seem to be listening. in your opinion where should we go to get planned parenthood defunded. >> i hope to be with abby johnson before they vote on another continuing resolution on the budget. she converted to our side, confirming live at sinn say this goes on in planned parenthood clinics -- confirming live action.
who was the ball player charged with having sex with an underage girl -- who was believed football player charged with having sex with an underage girl? lawrence taylor. when i heard that, do you know what i thought about double under age prostitutes runaway girls, girls in crisis. planned parenthood will readily give them birth control. planned parenthood will give them an abortion. planned parenthood will cover up statutory rape,, whatever. i think we -- statutory rape, whatever. we need to think about what planned parenthood really does. you bet the senate is a problem right now. harry reid says he will shut down the government before he will take money away from planned parenthood. i say to harry reid, go ahead.
[applause] go ahead. and i am hoping and praying that the house will stand firm. we have done better, pro-life. -- speaker john boehner, pro- life. we have the leadership in the house pro-life. we have the most pro-life congress ever. you know what congressman steve king already did. we want them to stand up like steve king did and say no. this is not negotiable. harry reid and all of you in the united states senate. i believe we are going to see some defunding hopefully
complete defunding . they get funding from the state government and the local. i want to applaud you. you give us hope who have been in the pro-life movement all of these years. i say now is the time to get it all we have got and to give a strong message to washington. i applaud you for what you are doing. can we applaud the young man? [applause] >> can i just say something positive -- here i come with the negative. we had 52 of the new members stand with us on the continuing resolution. it is ridiculous. i asked the leadership, how often do you have to start with
the line? we did not bring them much to help them. in this case, lyla rose was 18 years old and using her college loans to do these investigations. we handed them this package of smoking guns about planned parenthood and what they really do. they had 86 new members, fresh blood. i met with them all. they are ready to go. you have that all coming together. and yet something happened. the old washington way got involved. in zero bomb and the democrats want to fund this -- if obama and the democrats want to find this, stop using our federal funding for such practices. [applause] we have a question down in
front. >> i applaud everything you are doing. >> some states are ignoring the federal laws and rulings. for example, the proposal by republicans and democrats alike that fell by the wayside. our states are the places that are supposed to defend our rights. we need to pressure the supreme court. what about the law that says they should hold their offices during good behavior? the states need to push back too. the question is should we be pressing for amendments to supreme court cases or should we be pressing from the bottom up
to restore our rights and restore the federal government to its proper place in our lives? >> i agree with you. within 18 months, the supreme court is going to rule on the perry case. what you are suggesting is a return to federalism, a more constitutional form of government. i am not sure that will happen in one year and a half. if the supreme court rules that same-sex marriage is the law of the lead in this country the only way to overturn it once that happens is through a federal marriage amendment. they are the ones that are lower -- federalizing this issue. they are making it absolutely necessary. the only way to stop it is through and fma. if they lose at the higher court, the states can do what
they are doing. if we lose, we have just had a federal court out of iran -- create out of thin air the right to create something that is basic to society. we cannot let that happen. >> i would like to thank this panel. here comes tim moran. i do not want to steal your thunder, but i think you are going to dismiss them for lunch. >> thank you. we are ready to conclude our morning session for the conservative principles conference. we will take a one hour lunch break. we have the marriott, which has provided some $10 boxed lunches. included in the lunch is be beef ham, or turkey.
it is a full lunch. if you venture out to go to some of the local restaurants, one hour and we will come back for the afternoon session at 1:20 p.m. to listen to governor jim reynolds and michele bachmann. thank you and we will see you in one hour. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> you are in the middle of the conservative principles conference live from des moines iowa. during the lunch break we will be taking your calls about what you think of the potential 2012
presidential candidates. here are the numbers to call for democrats. residents of iowa can call 2025853887. some news has come to us within the last hour. geraldine ferraro died today at massachusetts general hospital. she was 75 years old after complications from a blood cancer. she was a schoolteacher in queens before her time in congress. when she applied to law school, a law school professor said, i hope you are serious. you are taking a man's place. she served as a vice president running mate. she leaves behind her husband of 50 years and three children. back to your calls. we are going to get your take on the field of presidential candidates lining up for 2012.
we have heard from some of them already today. mississippi governor haley barbour and former speaker newt gingrich. our first call comes from panama city, florida. >> they are a bunch of democrats. they are talking marriage and they have newt gingrich -- they are a bunch of hypocrites. they are talking marriage and the half newt gingrich, who is on his third marriage. i am so tired of this religious fanaticism. >> who do you want to see in the presidential line of? we are going to move on to san diego. hello, andrea. can you hear us? all rights, we are going to move on. jackson, mississippi. >> hello. how are you? i am calling.
i heard the last panel talking about the issues that are against women everything that seems to be talked about is against women or against quality of life. i would really like to see big republicans address what is facing our country, which is terrible -- i would like to see the republicans address what is facing our country which is terrible unemployment. i am not interested in hearing what they are going to do to stop abortion. it is the law of the land. it is not something in the top priority. 77% of americans believe women have the right to choose. why are we wasting our time, money, and talent on this? why don't we get to be real issues that will help a lot of americans. >> is there someone you would like to see on the presidential
ballots? >> i guess if i were to choose one, it would be mitt romney. he is sophisticated enough to be president. he is intelligent enough. he has the business background. out of the group that is out there, mitt romney would be my choice if i were picking a republican. >> next, we will go to scottsdale, arizona. are you there? let me try to get walt again. what do you think about today's ebay? -- today's event? >> i like it. i like the cultural policy that
the republicans are hanging onto. if you want to pass the first stone, go ahead. the one who called the gingrich a hypocrite, that is hypocrite call it a fine public servant a hypocrite. we are all sinners. we are hanging on to our social agenda our social culture the family that built this great nation. i would like to see newt gingrich, if he decides he wants to go, he is one of the most intelligent people we have. mitt romney is a flash in the pan. i do not see him in a presidential seat. he says one thing and does another as you can see through his work in massachusetts. another what i would like to see is the the michele bachmann or sarah palin. i would like to see one of those two finalists who have enough nerve. they have more nerve than some
of our male counterparts. they both have more nerve than our wonderful senator mccain from arizona. there was legislation he developed with feingold. i am glad he did not make it. thank you. >> we will be hearing from congresswoman michele bachmann later in the conference. also in the lineup is herman cain. he was the first gop candidate to announce his bid for president. john bolton is also scheduled to make an appearance. here is a call from omaha nebraska. >> thank you. i would like to say to you that i am against abortion. i would like to get rid of it completely. no abortion whatsoever except
for the life of the mother. i do not mind you republicans because you have all the jobs and you have all of the money. we need your jobs and money. i wish you would work with obama. i like him and he is the man i voted 4. thank you, ma'am. >> tom in iowa. hi. >> the one person i wish was there is governor chris christie. he has the charisma and character to lead this country. i wish he would have been there. >> that is who you would like to see on the ballot? >> yes. >> going out to iowa. >> my name is joshua cooper. i would like to see sarah palin as the next president and mitt
romney as the next vice president. >> what did you think of the event? have you been watching? >> yes. we need to eliminate abortion and eliminate the marriage. >> next on our republican line from albuquerque, new mexico. >> i have been watching pretty closely. i just wanted to say that prior tity number one is to get rid of barack obama. the best way to do that if they are smart is to have a ticket that consists of chris christie and marco rubio. i do not think the -- think obama would stand a chance with that ticket. chris christie eats unions for
breakfast. marco rubio will pull the hispanic vote away from the democrats. he is just as much of a superstar as obama was in 2006. if the republicans are smart that is who they will run, chris christie and marco rubio. >> if you are listening on c- span radio and cannot see the radio on c-span television, i want to remind you that democrats can call 202-585-3885. republicans can call 202-585- 3886. we are taking calls from iowa residents on 202-585-3887. we are getting your thoughts on the possible gop lineup for 2012. madisonville, kentucky. hello. >> my name is north dakota. u.s. -- my name is andy.
we have been headed in the wrong direction since the obama administration took over. i did not voted for missile --or mr. obama. i prayed for him. i am a conservative democrat. abortion and gay marriage are wrong. obama is leading us down the wrong track. >> who do you want to see on the ballot. >> i like newt gingrich. he is a great speaker. i think he is intelligent. i also like mike huckabee. i like sarah palin and michele bachmann, too. i have heard sarah palin speak more. i heard mike huckabee talking said he has been on his book tour. he would be a great candidate and a new face. i know he ran last time.
he is sincere. he would be a good one. i would like to see if mike huckabee would run. i know you were talking about herman cain, but maybe a mike huckabee or herman kane look up together. i know he said that when he was governor, he worked with mark warner the senator from virgina. maybe they could get together. mark warner is a democrat and he is conservative. we have some good conservative democrats out there, the bank. if they crossed the line, maybe a mike huckabee et day mark warner. that would be a good ticket. >> we are getting some ideas from our viewers and college. newt gingrich spoke earlier. we will be bringing you his comments. first, some phone calls. we will go to cold water, ohio. >> i like michele bachmann.
mike huckabee and chris christie. personally i want to see somebody in the seat of the presidency that stands for life. it is no wonder that the lord has been turning his back on our nation. we have been taking the lives of children. that is being number one priority for me. a nation cannot stand when it is taking the lives of its own children. also i note that these people stand for the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman. we have got to be able to return to some ethical principles again or how can we expect our nation to go on? i would like it if the nea would
be exposed more, too. i was a member and i was out spoken with and it. i know that the nea has a radical agenda. most of its members are totally on aware of it. >> thank you. we will leave it there and go to jerome in twin falls idah idaho. >> i have been looking and listening to beacons services -- to the conservatives talking. all you have been hearing about is abortion. if a woman has a right to choose on her body, they want the kids here but they do not want to give them anything. the republican governor does not want to give them any welfare or wic.
what is the bottom line? you don't want to help them when they are here. the collagen and the pell grants are taken away. >> who do you want to see on the presidential ticket? >> i want to see barack obama. these republicans are sellouts. in eight republican or a politician that -- any republican or a politician that talks the wall, check their record. all she is is talked a lot of rhetoric. michele bachmann, check her facts. >> we will go to jennifer who is our last call in twin falls -- in iowa. go ahead. jennifer, are you on the line with us?
it looks like we will go on to try one more who is coming from des moines, iowa. go ahead, you are on the air. >> i was hoping mitch daniels would be the republican nominee for 2012. it is depressing that his numbers are 4% in the cycle. he is also called a stalemate to the social conservative issues. i do not think those are the pressing issues at the time being. i do not think obama is equipped to tackle them. it is time that someone like mitch daniels who has experience with the private sector and government in this -- in these areas step forward. that is what we need rights >> not. now. >> he gets the last word today.
we are going back live to the conservative principles, but as soon as they reconvene after lunch. in the meantime, i want to let you know before we go back to the conference, we are going to take a look at today's weekly addresses. president obama talked about the military mission in libya. after we hear from the president, republican governor bob macdonald will discuss the one year anniversary of the passage of the health care bill and its affect on states. this is about 10 minutes. >> last week, when i ordered our armed forces to protect the libyan people from the brutality of muammar gaddafi i pledged to keep the american people fully informed. i spoke about the limited scope and purpose of this mission great today i can report that banks to the brave men and women in uniform, we have -- that thanks to the brave men and women in uniform we have made
progress. in the united states, we should not and cannot intervene every time there is a crisis somewhere in the world. i firmly believe that when innocent people are being brutalized when someone like gaddafi threatens a bloodbath that can destabilize entire region and when the international community is prepared to come together to save many thousands of lives it is in our national interest to act. it is our responsibility. this is one of those times. our military mission in libya is clear and focus. along with our allies and partners, we are enforcing the mandate of the united nations security council. we are protecting the libyan people from gaddafi's forces. but it plays a no-fly zone to prevent further atrocities. but as we put in place and hope i zone to prevent further -- a no-fly zone to prevent further
atrocities. his forces have been pushed back. make no mistake. because we acted quickly a humanitarian catastrophe has been avoided and the lives of countless civilians innocent men, women, and children have been saved. as i pledged at the outset, the role of american forces has been limited. we are not putting any ground forces into libya. our military has provided unique capabilities at the beginning. this is a broad international effort. our allies and partners are enforcing the no-fly zone over libya and the arms embargo at sea. air partners like the united arab emirates have committed aircraft. this week, responsibility for this operation is being transferred from the united states to our nato allies and partners. this is how the international community should work, more nations, not just the united
states bearing the response ability and cost of up holding peace and security. this military effort is part of our larger strategy to support the libyan people and hold the gaddafi regime accountable. together with the international committee, we are delivering humanitarian assistance. we are offering support to the libyan opposition. we have frozen tens of billions of dollars of gaddafi's assets that can meet the aspirations of the libyan people. every day, the pressure on gaddafi and his regime is increasing. our message is clear and unwavering. gaddafi's attack against civilians must not. his wishes must pull back. humanitarian assistance must be allowed to reach those in need. those responsible for violence must be held accountable. muammar gaddafi has lost the company of his people and legitimacy to will. the aspirations of the libyan people must be realized. in recent days, we have heard
the voices of libyans expressing their gratitude for this mission. you saved our lives said one libyan. said another today there is hope. every american can be proud of the lives we have stayed in libya and of the service of our men and women in uniform who once again i stood up for our interests and our ideals. people in libya and around the world are seeing that the united states of america stands with those who vote for a future where they can determine their own destiny. >> will soar virginia governor bob macdonald. before i began -- i am virgina governor bob mcdonnell. i want to thank the men and women in uniform for their great work in afghanistan and iraq and their belief efforts in japan. but it is home to many of our nation's most important -- virginia is home to many of our nation's most important military
installations. my top priority is to restore fiscal responsibility and help the private sector create the jobs our citizens need. here in the states, we have to balance our budgets. we cannot print money and we have strict that limits. we had to live within our means. we manage our state but just like you run your family and business but does. -- we manage our state budgets just like you run your family and business budgets. we closed at this by cutting spending, not raising taxes. but as we closed -- we closed our deficit by cutting spending, not raising taxes. our work in the state is at risk of being undermined by the
unrealistic and irresponsible policies coming from washington. chief among them, the passage of the federal health care bill. unlike states, families, and businesses, the federal government does not have to balance its budget. that leads to policies like the federal health care bill that pushes expensive programs on to the rest of us. washington passes the law and expects us to balance the books. one year after the federal health care bill was rammed through the congress in a partisan vote, we see that it has more to do with expanding controlled by the federal government and reforming our health care system. the 2700 page legislation will not work. it creates new entitlements and bureaucracies and could cost all of us fewer jobs and lost opportunities. the law shifts billions of unfunded mandates on to state governments.
the result is higher costs, and less innovation and freedom. that is a prescription for serious problems at the state level. much of this plan must be implemented there. the federal health care bill dramatically expands medicaid, which was already growing at unsustainable rates. in virginia, state spending on medicaid has grown by 69% over the past 10 years. the program -- 1600% in the past 10 years. i did a federal health care bill, virginia will be forced to spend $2 billion more on medicaid between 2014 and 2022. the more spending required for medicaid retirements -- medicaid and thomas, the less money for schools -- medicaid
entitlements, the less money for schools and higher education. it will lead to painful decisions that will impact every americans. it is not only a budget buster it is unconstitutional. virginia is challenging this legislation in the courts. a federal district court judge has ruled in our favor concluding that the provision that virginia citizens must but this -- must purchase insurance is unconstitutional. courts are split on this issue. everyone agrees that the case will be cited -- will be decided by the united states supreme court. the same administration that was in a rush to pass the bill is in no hurry to find out if it is legal. the legal issues must be decided probably by the courts. shockingly the obama administration opposes an
expedited appeal to the supreme court, the furing the potential d-eferring -- deferring the potential to the courts. we must make our health-care system more as possible -- more accessible and accountable. we believe the best way to do that is by repealing this bill and replacing it with innovative, free-market policies. we can do that by instituting real lawsuit reform, allowing citizens to purchase health care insurance across state lines encouraging health savings accounts and focusing on prevention and real health maintenance. those are just a few of the ideas. we need policies that give greater freedom to citizens and employers and do not overly burdened states and businesses, policies that recognize what
history teaches. creative solutions to the free market we was size -- to the free market beat one size fits all. we need to help the private sector create jobs provide access to affordable health care and get our economy back on track by making our state more competitive. we are asking this administration to join us. thank you for taking the time to listen today. have a great weekend. >> president obama is going to deliver a speech on libya to mile from the national defense university here in washington, d.c. he will get an update on the situation there, including the action the united states has taken and the transition nato command and control. that is the president's speech on libya tomorrow on c-span and c-span radio. today, we are bringing you live
coverage of the conservative principles political action committee conference in iowa. they are on a lunch break. while we wait 40 conference to reconvene, here are remarks from -- while we wait for the conference to reconvene, here are remarks from haley barbour and newt gingrich. >> thank you. i am glad to be a. let me say to all of you, we are on a fast, hard clock. steve told me i had 16 minutes and 48 seconds for this. i told him that with my accent, i ought to get longer. he told me i was lucky he was letting me do this without an interpreter. [applause] [laughter] i am tickled to be lit.
-- to be here. thank you for being here. it is a short period of time. for 2012, it is critical that we elect a new president of the united states. [applause] i want to say to you that i think the best way the critical way, the only way is for us to make sure that, like the 2010 campaign the 2012 campaign is focused on policies. focused on the policies of this administration, which are bad for the economy and bad for job creation and focus on what the right policies would be. the american people agree with us on policy. they showed in the 2010 election the most massive repudiation of any president's policy in the history of the
united states for good reason. let me just say that is the one thing we want to be focused on. i would describe it this way. some of you are old enough to remember david sullivan. maybe a couple love you. -- remember ed sullivan. one night he had conrad hilton on the ed sullivan show. he created a new business, the luxury hotel chain. he was the bill gates of his day, a business icon. and sullivan -- ed sullivan turned to him and said, if you can tell the american people one thing, what would it be? conrad hilton said, but the shower curtain inside a bathtub. there is a guy who knew what was important to him. what is important to us is to
have a new president anywhere 20th of 2013. -- january 20 of 2013. this election needs to be about policy. when president obama was elected, the american people thought they were born to focus- is a lie -- they were going to focus like a laser on the time. the policies of this administration have made it harder to create jobs and less likely to that economic growth. the president has been calling for the largest tax increase in american history a tax increase that falls on employers. he fought for it for two years. his first two years we had hanging over the economy the idea of the largest tax increase in american history. how are potential employers point to decide to hire more people when they think they are going to get slapped with a tax
increase? in the lame-duck session after the president had lost because no republican senator would voted for the huge tax increase, he threw in the call and agreed to extend the bush tax cut without the tax increase. all our friends in the news media, the ones in the back talking -- [applause] our friends in the news media said this heralded a move to the center like bill clinton's triangulation, that obama had learned his lesson. it reminded me of president reagan. my old boss. he is to say, the first play of the democratic playbook is take up the middle and run around the left end. [laughter] sure enough, the president made
the state of the union address and he said he wanted that largest tax increase in american history and he was going to try to get its. within a couple of days, we saw his budget. it called for $1.30 trillion of tax increases on the american people. $93 billion of increases on the oil and gas industry. who is pointing to a that? exile -- who is point to pay -- going to pay that? achekzai? exxon? no the people at the gas pump. the obama administration is populated by people who have unlimited faith in limitless government. they think a bigger government means a bigger economy.
let me tell you. a bigger government means a smaller economy. [applause] when the government sucks all the money out of the economy how is the private sector supposed to create jobs? the data on this is simple. wendy -- when the spending goes up, government --spending goes up private investment goes down. when private investment goes up, unemployment goes down. private investment goes up, where people are working. remember that is our goal. when we talk about cutting spending, we are talking about cutting spending for our children and grandchildren. we are talking about cutting spending because of the effects on the deficit and the debts. we need to cut spending to grow
the economy. everybody sitting in this room knows that your family cannot spend itself rich. the government cannot stand itself richie the. if you took -- the government cannot spend itself rich either. the government --the president's budget called for a big deficit to go up. and-and you were running your business that -- imagine you're running your business that way. you were taking in 42% more than you were --you were spending 42% of what you were taking in the. it you wrote a book, it would -- you were spending 402% more
htanthan you were taking in. if you wrote a book, it would start with chapter 11. betsy was deeply involved in the hillary-care debate. i never thought the point of health care reform was to make health care premiums go up. that is what is happening. how do employers hire more people when they do not know what their obligations or costs for health care for those employees will be? again, obama's policies kirk's job creation, stymie economic growth-- hurt job creation, stymie economic growth.
the obama energy policy is to drive up the cost of energy so that americans will use less of it. if you think about it, that is their policy. i can remember president obama when he was a candidate for president interviewed by the san francisco chronicle. he said, under my cap and trade plan, electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket. -isis-necessary --necessarily skyrocket. how do you grow the economy with energy costs are going up for businesses, for families? that is what they have tried to do. why? because it is environmental policy not energy policy. energy policy in the united states would be more american energy. that is what we need in our country. [applause]
as gasoline blows by $3.50 a gallon, remember how this administration has shut down oil production in the gulf of mexico. in the gulf, we produced 30% of the domestic oil production in the united states. the administration once gas prices started skyrocketing announced that they gave to permits for drilling in the gulf. you had to read the fine print to find out they were not permit for new wells. they work permits to resume drilling on wells they had forced them to stop drilling on. we need more oil. we need more gas. we need more coal. we need more nuclear. we need more american energy. [applause] that includes alternatives.
my state is a center for biofuels. we had an ethanol plant in mississippi. we also generate energy from other things, from wood, from waste. there is a huge plant under a permit to take coal and turn it into most of fuels. -- motor fuels. we needed efficiency and conservation as well. from the time the british dropped achor in jamestown, what our competitive advantages in the country has been abundant energy. that needs to be our energy policy, more american energy. [applause] they say that it is a mistake to
stifle the urge to applaud. [laughter] if it is not bad for you, it is bad for me. i want to say i appreciate your perseverance. [laughter] you could see as we look through the policies of this administration why we want the next election to be about policies. these are the wrong policies. these policies make it harder for us to create jobs. we should not ever forgets that the goal here is not cutting spending for the sake of cutting spending. the goal is to grow the economy. the goal is to return to the chance where every young man and woman can live the american dream and see the opportunities in front of them. when we talk about these policies, i urge you to
remember the most important thing, cutting spending. it is the means to an end. the end is to continue to grow our economy, tahiti to create jobs to continue to approve the -- to continue to create jobs, to continue to approve the quality of life. my friend, fred smith is the founder of federal express. he says, the main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing. the main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing. the main thing is economic growth and job creation for our people. that will solve a multitude. [applause] do the math on what 4.5% growth in gdp would do for our budget
deficit. look at ronald reagan's period after the 1982 recessionary period. at this stage, the time it was growing 9%. this economy is growing 2.8%. most of that growth is because of this gigantic deluge of federal spending. we need to grow the private economy. that has got to be our focus. grow when the economy takes a change of policy. why is it worth so much? let's just think about the people who came to iowa or the people who came to mississippi or the people who came to america.
seeking a mate -- seeking religious freedom. many of them, yes. they also knew what ronald reagan knew. religious freedom political freedom are totally intertwined with economic freedom. [applause] with the power to make our own decisions, to have a country where anybody can make the most of his or her god-given talent and hard work and there will be a reward for that in a market- oriented capitalistic system. that system has created more wealth, more opportunity a greater, stronger, more powerful country and a culture that had never been he imagined before in
the history of the world. it was created right here in america. an exceedingly exceptional country. i wish we had some people in this administration who had signed the front side up a paycheck in their lives. [applause] . . sector that creates wealth. the government has no money except what it takes from the taxpayers. we need taxpayers to have the opportunity. they do not need the government elite in washington to tell them what to do. this administration to often thinks we are too stupid to take care of our -- too often thinks
we ought to banks to bid to take care of ourselves. they need -- this gov administration thinks we are too stupid to take care of our citizens. i am grateful for your being here and for having the chance to say to you that we need to make sure our children and grandchildnherits the same country we inherited. that is what this election will be about. thank you very much. [applause] analyst for the fox news channel. ladies and gentlemen, speaker newt gingrich. [applause]
>> first of all, it is great to be here. i am proud of what steve king has done in bringing this together. i am proud of what steve king is doing in washington to defund and stop obamacare, where he is playing a major leadership role. i am gl to be back. i will probably reinforce for steve that what he is doing is really important. we have to draw the line in the sand this year. we have to stop obamacare from being implemented this year. this is a major step toward a washington controlled, bureaucratically defined america
in which some bureaucrat tells you what you can do. if you go to health transformation.net you will see that there is a big poster that you can get and download for free. it has 1968 specific grants of power to the secretary of health and human services and other washington bureaucrat in obamacare. you look at that list and say to yourself is there abody in this room w honestly believes that the federal bureaucracy can implement that level of detail control over your health care, includinghat the secretary of human services shall define as the characteristics of measuring your teeth for oral care. i spoke to an orthodontist and
said how many of you believe secretary sebelius has the knowledge to define the to coverage of oral care. they broke up laughing. it is not a laughing matter. steve king understands that. he is turning up the heat in washington. i hope all of you will continue encouraging them to do that. i hope you will listen to him and all his leadership on this important issue. [applause] we are delighted tbe back here. she spent four years getting to know i will winters better. she is from western wisconsin so e thought of it as going south for the winter. i am optimistic. i believe that in 2012, we could win an historic election and we
could end the 80 year dominance of the left and fundamentally recent this country back to a center-right government reflecting the core values of the american people. [applause] i think there are three large topics on which we can recent america. the first is values. this is truly a center right country, not a left wing country. the second is the economy. this is a cntry that favors jobs paychecks, and economic growth. the third is economic -- is national security. gallup asked the question, do you believe that the constitution and the declaration of independence make america an exceptional country or do you believe we are a normal country?
80byby 80 to 18, the american people said we are an exceptional country. the 18 includes many of our bureaucrats, many of our news media. the fight we are i where we outnumber them bettethan 4 to is t say we actually mean it. to say that every class k-12 and every tax paid college and university should teach the declaration of independence -- [applause] i do not care what the aclu says they should teach it accurately and they should explain what the founding fathers meant by saying "we hold
these truths" -- not philosophies or ideologies -- " to be self-evident and we are in doubt by our creator with certain inalienable rights." some say we should stay away from values and stay away from social issues. if you do not start with values or start by establishing who we are as americans, the rest of it does not matter. life is not just about money. [applause] second, we have to talk about the economy. it's a matter of values. america works when americans are working. america works when you can provide for your family.
i want to create wealth so that every american has a chance for a better future. they are being productive and engaged in useful work. they are doing something that is meaningful for them. we have to get this economy growing again. we have focus on cutting spending in washington, getting power back out of washington, controlling the bureaucrats who are trying to control us, and making it desirable and successful to invest and create jobs in america so that we can have a better future. the president in brazil got it exactly backward. present obama goes to brazil and says to brazilians, i am glad you are drillinfor oil offshore. then he says, i hope we can be your customer. that is exactly backwards. i want us to create american energy in america. i want resilience to be our customers.
-- i want the people of brazil to be our customers. [applause] the obama economic model is borrow money from the chinese and give it to the brazilians. our model ought to be and that in america create american jobs -- our model ought to be create american jobs and sell products to the chinese bid is the opposite of the model of obama. -- create american jobs and sl products to the chinese. it is the opposite model of oba. i help to balance the american budget for four straight years. -- i helped to balance the budgets for four straight years.
this shocked so many people in washington. we quit spending. it is amazing how much that to you get to a balanced budget he quit spending. we had the slowest increase in modern times. the four years i was speaker we did not raise taxes. we cut taxes. we had the largest capital gains tax in american history. we wanted to put people back to work. we designed tax cuts that made it possible to create businesses. if you want to balance this federal budget, the north 1 onenumbernumber thing thing you can do is have people back to work
so they are not getting food stamp or unemployment or mediid. the difference spending and revenue in that that is the number one step back to a balanced budgets. there are things you want the government to stop doing. you can probably disband 2/3 of the department of energy. we would have more ergy. [applause] we have to focus on a serious conversation about national security. there were articles last week say was one way or the other about libya. each day i was on telision, i was responding to where the president was that way. there were contradictions because one day he was here and
the other day he was over here. they can say i was commenting both ways. that is true. i was trying to follow him up. if you had asked me if we should jump in, i would have said no. once we jump in the lateke i say to swim as fast as you can. it is not a contradiction if you are already in the lake. on march 3, he said gaddafi has to go. he pitted the prestige and power of the united states against a dictator that has been anti- american for over 40 years. i believe the only rational objective of the current intervention is to deft gaddafi as rapidly as possible. i would do it by using egyptian jordanian ground
forces as advisers with the rebels using all western air power as decisively as power. a no-fly zone does not just mean airplanes. i think this is linguistically stupid. i have never seen a flying tanks. [laughter] if they want to create a suppressions own to defeat the libyan military, then the honest and say that is what we're doing. it is a totally different process. once you get involved, i believe you get involved decisively. you win quickly and minimize casualties. you get it over quickly. you say you are getting rid of gaddafi because you want his military to get up every morning to the simple message that he is gone. [applause] if you are of the libyan military and wondering if the
americans are serious and whether you can hold out -- you watch our white house arguing. i want to say to the things about foreign policy. we have to risk the lives of young americans. we have to have the courage to tell the truth about who is trying to kill us. it is not a random behavior. it is radical islamists motivated by deep belief against our situation. -- against our civilization. [applause] we need a commander in chief with the courage to tell the truth, not a spectator in chief confused about whether his job is kicking a soccer ball or leading the united states. last week on national security, i am and historian. --lastly on national security,
i am and historian. someone explained the unit in nations and arab league. i went back because as a historian, i did not remember this. we were up at independence hall with the constitution and the declarations of independence. i went back to check. you can do this with your own copy of the constitution. i could not find the arab league anywhere in the constitution. [laughter] i found congress. i found the idea that the president might consult with the united states congress. but to say to americans that he is relying on a collection of dictators called the arab league and a corrupt institution called the united nations -- he did not get around to consulting the congress. that is it fundamentally false model of american government. [applause]
people ask how quick you could start turning things around. we are working on a project from the first day. all of you who have watched inauguration's know that the president goes inside to have lunch with the congressional leadership after the inauguration. what if there was a one hour break in the president went into a room in the capital and signed executive orders that were already discussed and on the internet that had already been drafted by veterans from the reagan and bush administrations? you could do this within minutes to begin turning the government around. the first executive order might be to abolish every bizarre -- czar in the white house as of that minute.
[applause] the second executive order might be to reimpose ronald reagan's mexico city policy and abolish any federal money going anywhere in the world to pay for abortion. [applause] the third executive order might be to reinstitute george w. bush's policy on enforcing the right of conscience and that no government can force you to perform an abortion or any other act against europe religious beliefs >> we go back now to live coverage. if you can please take your
>> looking at the conservative principles conference. we're waiting to get started. want to mention a correction to an earlier announcement. president obama will deliver a speech about libya on monday. we'll have live coverage on c-span and c-span radio on the president's speech on monday. for now let's take a look at this morning's remarks by conservative principles pac founder iowa congressman steve king.
at one or more who will get their ticket punched out of iowa one day on the ride to new hampshire and south carolina and perhaps nevada michigan, florida. but givet a feeling that the die will be cast before that list has had their primary's roong along the way. >> looks like the participants are coming bagic together. so we will leave this earlier portion and take you straight there. we're expecting to hear from former ambassador to the u.n.
as well as michelle backman. >> please welcome my friend our friend lieutenant governor reynolds. [applause] thank you very much. i appreciate that introduction. well, good afternoon. and it is a great day to be a conservative in iowa. thank you for being a part of this remarkable advance. we thank congressman king for putting it on. let's make this an annual event. [applause] congressman king thank you for leading the conservative fight in washington, d.c. you recall an early and enthusiastic supporter of mine
and i will never forget that. from my days as county treasure to serving as the state senator in district 48, and ultimately when you cast my nomination for lieutenant governor on the floor of the republican state convention in june i have always appreciated valued and have been humbled by your unwaivering support. [applause] and now i am proud to stand before you and this great crowd of supporters as iowa's lieutenant governor. [applause] you know, congressman king it doesn't seem that long ago that you boldly marched down that conservative path to win your first election in the iowa state senate. and i want you to know that governor brown said, and i, are
determined to continue down that same unapologetic conservative path for iowa. [applause] i want to welcome senator demint. i want to thank you for joining us as you continue your efforts on behalf of those causes that americans hold so dear. senator demint and congressman king, it is your efforts with regard to obama care that is appreciated by iowans and by americans as a whole. this socialistic socialist monstrossty spends too much at a time of record deficits. it violates the constitution and it places americans at a cross roads. will we continue down the path to bigger government, higher taxes, unsustainable debt, and less freedom? or will we stand strong to
deliver a message that america must change course? [applause] our founders fought and died for liberty not social programs at the expense of another man's labor. thankfully by being here today i know which road you have chosen. the one that restores values, fiscal accountability, and some sanity in washington, d.c. as one of his first acts, governor brand sted signed on with 25 other states to challenge this boon doggle known as obama care and we are confident that this will be found unconstitutional and our individual rights will be restored. having this event in iowa is
meaningful in and of itself. everyone said that the 2008 iowa caucus campaign would be the most important in the nation and it was and do you know why? it was sadly to say iowa's the state that launched barack obama on his way to the presidency. but do you know what else? iowa is going to be the state that will help pack his bags and send him back to chicago. [applause] that's why we want to say that the 2011 caucus season is so important here in iowa we encourage every single individual out there that's considering a run to come to 83 to visit all counties and give every iowaen out there to ask them the tough questions about what is important to us so we
can hear their responses and we can put a true leader back in the president's office. governor brand sted and vi hit the ground running from day one. we have already been to over a third of iowa's counties. and a funny thing has happened on that campaign trail. we have found that iowans expect us to govern and they expect on -- on what we campaigned on and they expect us to follow through with the promises that we made. and i am so proud to stand here today and tell you that we have done just that. we have not forgotten you. we will remove the text and regulatory burdens and unleash the private sector so they can do what they do best and that
is create jobs and we will do everything that we can to meet that ambitious goal of 200,000 new jobs over the next five years and putting unemployed iowans back to work. with your help we will restore iowa's schools back to their position in this country reduce government spending and increase income for all iowans. it's not rocket science and it's not complex. it's our shared conservative values that have brought you here today to this great event and that is what will get this state back on course, put in place, a solid foundation and make us competitive for the future. we cabinet do it alone -- can't do it alone. congressman king needs your support, senator demint needs your support and governor brad sted and i need your support.
now, let's contact our state representatives senators, congressmen and senators. attend our local events and make our and your voices heard. demand smaller government an end to deficits, passing on the repeal of obama care. a silent majority no more. to quote ben franklin, people willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both. [applause] our time is now. join us and put iowa, our country on a solid foundation of conservative principles for the future of this great state and this exceptional country that we have the honor to live in.
thank you and god bless. [applause] >> thank you lieutenant governor reynolds. thank you, stephanie. the next speaker really needs no introduction but i'm going to do it anyway. michele bachmann was elected to her first term in the u.s. house of representatives in 2006. in short order she has become a prominent and outspoken proponent for fundamental reform to our government. to that point she founded tea party caucus in the house which has over 50 members, all republicans by the way, and just this year four united states senators joined, rand
paul, mike lee, jerry moran and tonight's speaker jim demint. the focus for congresswoman balk man and the tea party caucus is fiscal restraint and limited government. but most importantly an adherence to the constitution. she also serves on the financial services committee and the permanent select intelligence committee in the house. but long before any of her campaigns or titles, michele bachmann was greatly involved in the pro-life and pro-family movement. and not only has she and her husband raised their five children, they were also foster parents to another 23 children. perhaps those strong family values tie back to the state of iowa. please join me in welcoming back to iowa congresswoman michele bachmann. [applause]
>> hi, everyone. isn't it exciting to be here? there is no place like iowa. we love it. and it's wonderful to be in a state where you have the king of conservatism, steve king. my colleague. [applause] steve and i are actually a match, i think. in washington, d.c. we like to get in the same arena. we like to fight the same fights beginning with one of the fights that president obama brought to us. does anyone remember the $1 trillion stimulus bill? and we were all promised that we would never see unemployment go above 8% if we spent $1 trillion. right? so let me ask you a question. did president obama correctly diagnose the problem with job
creation? did he have the correct solution with spending $1 trillion? what's his level of credibility on job creation? not so much. that's right. iowans are very intelligent people. besides being extremely good looking. and very well tempered. also another area that steve and i have teamed and worked a lot on is the issue of obama care. the government takeover of health care. let me z you. did the president correctly diagnose the problem with health care in this country? it was high cost. wasn't it? the high cost of health care. did he correctly diagnose the solution? no. he didn't understand that free markets would help us bring the cost down. what's his credibility on obama care? not so much. that's right. oh, we're working here. ok. so now remember when the president talked about how
during the obama care negotiations all of the negotiations would be like this today, what steve king is providing for you on c-span? did that happen? what's the president's level of credibility? not so much. now, i want to remind you. that's not to mention that the president was 0-4 last year in his final 4 predictions. do you remember that? ok. we'll let him have that. now he has us engaged in yet another third middle eastern war. so ink talk about march madness. can anyone say jimmy carter? that's kind of where we're going. but i am here in iowa because this 2012 election is extremely important. how many of you feel the same way? oh yes. all of our chips are riding on
2012. number one, they have to clearly diagnose and understand the times that we're living in. number two they have to have solutions for the problems that america is facing. and number three and perhaps even more important is they have to have the political courage to stand up to the interests, stand up to washington, d.c., stand up to the big spenders and do what has to be done. that's what we need in our candidate for 2012. because we are a nation of risk takers. that is how the nation started. i am an iowaen. i was born here in iowa almost 55 years ago to the week and i am a seventh generation iowaen. that's even better. my forebearers were big tall strapping.
norwegians who casme from -- came from norway. they risked everything to pack up their five children and come to iowa because they heard that this was a land of milk and honey. and it's all true. isn't it? it's all true. iowa is the land of milk and honey. look, we have one person clap for iowa being the -- i agree with you. i think you're absolutely right. thank you. and yet everything that my great great great grand parents worked for that your ancestors worked for is at risk today. isn't it? it's at risk today. and what happens between now and november 6 of 2012 especially here in iowa will forge the difference with what happens in 2012. do you think you're up to it? i know you're up to it.
i know you are. because what we are about to determine is whether or not quite frankly we will pass the american dream on to the next generation. this is faithfully happened at least for the seven generations that i know of here in iowa. but for the generations that add up to approximately 20 generations of american history, every generation has faithfully passed that torch of liberty to the next one. but we know what's at risk. and i want to share briefly with you a few statistics. let's start with the number 75. 75% as a matter of fact. that is the amount the national debt has increased just under the four years that nancy pelosi held the gavel. it took us 231 years to establish something over $8 trillion in debt. it took her four years to run up $6 trillion more in deficit
to get us up to $14 trillion. of course that made our chinese banker friends very happy. and you know that the chinese leader is named president hu. so now we know that hu is your daddy. so here's -- who says iowa doesn't have a sense of humor. it's born right here. 107 trillion. that's enough to curl your hair. 107 trillion. that's the estimated number of unfunded net federal liabilities in social security and medicare. and when today's college students retire, my son for instance who is 24 years of age, they are looking upwards of 37% of their income just going to pay that figure. let alone another 25% or so for their federal income tax let
alone their state income tax let alone property tax sales tax, let alone gas tax let alone their every time you turn around tax and they will have a very different future than the ones our parents left for us. the next number 35%. that is now the highest corporate tax rate in the world. and it's in the united states of america. you only need to look at this number to know why we have outsourcing of jobs. we want the united states to be the best place for job creation in the world. and we can be. cut taxes so that we can have jobs here in the united states beginning with iowa. now, here's a very scary number for all of you. 3.8 million. what could that be? the i.r.s. can't even teleyou. this is pralkly the number of words in the tax code. happy reading.
3.8 million words. how many of you are filling out your tax forms right now? i'm a former federal tax lawyer. i've read some of these words. it's no fun. let's make it simple. what about fairer? anybody like a fair tax or a flat tax? i think it could safely be said that our current united states tax code is a weapons of mass destruction bloling let's look at the number one. that's the number of drilling permits since they came into office. gee, maybe that has something to do be this next figure. $1.83. that is the price of gasoline the day before barack obama took office as president of the united states. is it time for a change? absolutely.
i'm an entrepreneur with my husband. we've created 50 jobs in the state of minnesota. we're proud of that. you cannot create jobs when you have a president that is unwilling to use american energy resources to solve our problems here in the united states. let's look at our next number. 19 of 20. hmm. what could that be? that's the number of major metropolitan markets here in the united states where home prices have fallen in just the last quarter. what do you think the one major metropolitan area is washington, d.c. where the money is big it never shuts off. why? because they have iowa's money in washington, d.c. let's bring it back home. let's bring it back to iowa. 129. we have 129 miles that are currently under control at our southern border out of 2,000
miles. that is ain credible statistic. that is the highest level of -- 129 miles. let me read to you from the department of homeland security a senior official who said, human smuggling constitutes a significant risk to our national security and public safety and could potentially be exploited by terrorists and other extremist organizations seeking entry. how many of you think that qualifies for one of the greatest understatements in our time? that is absolutely true. let's go to our next set of numbers. 6,000. that's how many pages of rules has already been written in washington, d.c. to implement obama care. and you thought that a 2700 bill was unwieldy? this is a bill that will never finish being written. because washington will continue to redefine the government takeover of health
care. let's go to our next number. more than 1,000. that's the number of waivers that have already been granted to obama care. is something missing here? aren't we a nation that is equal protection under the law? i guess it's more equal for some than for others when you grant waivers to obama care. in fact, one of steve king's and my colleagues this week anthony weiner from new york came out and -- now, we're nice here in iowa. i just want to remind you. and anthony weiner said he wanted a waiver from obama care. now, this is rich. because our colleague anthony weiner said that he wrote the bill for obama care. in fact, his quote was the bill and i are one. now, if anthony weiner wants a waiver i want mine too. i want a waiver from the last two years of president obama.
are you with me? let's go to our last number. i think because of the great work that steve king has been doing and i've been trying to do we've tried to let the country know about this figure. 105 billion 464 million. does anybody know what i'm referring to? this was the money that was hiden in plain sight in the obama care bill in order to pre-fund the obama care. i believe that president obama needs to give this money back to the american people. [applause] you won't find one newspaper story, one radio show or one tv story about this money. you can't just do this to the american people. fail to testimony them that
when your representative votes for the takeover of health care they're also voting for 105 billion to fund it? you can't just do that. that's why they have to give the money back and that's why also steve king and i have worked very hard in our nation's capital together with other colleagues who have figured out what a problem obama care is. every member of the house of representatives voted to repeal obama care. and now we are calling on them to vote to defund obama care by agreeing to not pass one more spending bill unless president obama gives this money back. [cheers and applause] we've seen what all of these problems are. but the real problem that underlines all of these figures is this. it's the fact that washington, d.c. truly believes that all
power and all money should be air gated to them so that they can run and control your lives. is that what thomas jefferson and our founders wrote in the declaration of independence and then in the constitution of the united states? i don't think so. thomas jefferson said he could see into the future that big government would be the problem. he said let's bind them down with the constitution. weren't they wise in what they wrote? that was very wy because what they understood is that the solution to our problems was not washington, d.c. because what did they do? they come up with really great ideas like cowboy poetry festival. that's a must have. or like telling you which kind of light bulb you have to go down to your hard ware store and buy. and by the way just so you know, i introduced the light bulb freedom of choice act. yes.
i think iowaens are to be trusted on the choice of their own libetbubs. and who can access the internet and what are schools can teach? we don't need them to give us the answers to those questions. the ultimate arrogance in my opinion coming out of washington is obama care. because obama care will decide who your doctor is ultimately. they will say oh no we aren't. oh, yes they will. with this bill we're all going to be spending more and getting less. now think of that. you get less you spend more. what a deal what a deal. no wonder last year every week that rasmussen has been taking a poll never once has it gone below a majority of americans. not just conservatives not just republicans. but never below a majority of americans who want to see obama
care repealed. as a matter of fact, this last week it was 62% the highest number of americans yet that want to see us repeal obama care. [applause] this is i believe the greatest power grab that we have ever seen and i believe it is a crime against our constitutional republic because the debt clock is ticking and it's changing now forever. we've seen how this movie is going to end. we've seen it in greece. it's not a pretty picture. we've seen it in the u.k. we've seen it in spain. it's not a pretty picture. we've seen it in madison wisconsin. it is not a pretty picture. and so again the president is making the wrong calls. he's making the wrong calls. and i'm thankful that we have republicans standing up like governor scott walker in wisconsin, governor casic in
ohio. they're standing up. for less government, for more freedom. and again, the constitution holds the answer. this venerable document. gee, i don't think it was 2700 pages long. it said this. we, the people we are the answer to the problem today in the united states. because you need to be put back in charge of your own health care. you need to be allowed to create jobs because you're the only one who knows how to create jobs. the federal government doesn't have a clue how to create jobs. you do. and you can choose what cars you drive. not what cars are. you can choose what light bulbs. you can choose all of these things. we don't need the government because you understand the solution for taxing, for protecting our borders, and research backs it up. it is families that are the solution and the ultimate building block for america.
because no stimulus, no entitlement reform, no health care initiative, no educational revamp can match the power of an intact, two parent family and driving economic growth health and well being in the united states. [applause] and i come from a family where my parents did divorce. i understand the difficulty and the difficulty that is single parents have. and this is not to den grate them in any way. but it's also to say our government needs to prefer a tax code and a policy that prefers family formation and the building up of families so that children have a safe environment to grow up because no one loves them more than mom and dad. no government agency, no government bureaucrat. it's mom and dad.
we've been told that we need a truce on social issues and i would highly disagree with that because the truth is social conserveatism is fiscal conserveatism. i mentioned just briefly about the fair tax. i am as a tax lawyer as i told you earlier my opinion is this. we make the tax code simpler by first abolishing it. so abolish what we have. and from there we're going to fly. i have no douth. we need a change in size, we need a change in attitude because the attitude and arrogance of washington, d.c. having the answers is just not working out. because that is not what our forebearers understood that's not what i understand. that's not what you understand. that's not what our children need in the future. what we need is a change in
address form for the person that's living at 1600 pennsylvania avenue. [applause] when my forebearers came here in the 1850s they did not come here for handout they did not come here for the government takeover of health care. they came here because they were wide eyed with excitement at what the future would bring ultimately for a seventh generation iowaen granddaughter and they were willing to risk all to make it happen. they bore the fruit of courageously waging inch by inch yard by yard, vote by vote the a battle for freedom that we are the grateful recipients for what they have done. which takes me back to another dark horse candidate. you may have heard of him from a large near by state. his name was abraham lincoln.
and when he won his very doubtful election which no one thought that he could win he took a whittle stop tour and he stopped off at indianapolis, indiana and the nation was on the precipus of war. his own life and presidency was in danger and abraham lincoln poured his heart out to the crowd at indianapolis as they gathered and i want to quote from abraham lincoln's words. he said, i appeal to you constantly to bear in mind that it's not with the politicians and it is not with presidents and it is not with office seekers but it is with you, and that is the question. shall the union and shall the liberties of this country be preserved to the latest generation? and what lincoln said at the back of the train is still true today. it's with you.
it's with you to make that decision. will we survive to the latest generation? will we survive? and as i am here listening and speaking to people in iowa, i say to you as wonderful as steve king is, don't look to stee king. don't look to me. don't look to any other politician because the preservation of our nation, the preservation of liberty is too important to entrust it with mere politicians. the idea of liberty is so great and yet so precious that the founders recognized they could only be entrusted with the brain trust. and that's the people of this nation. because they understood that it was our values that were the underpinning of this nation. john adams wrote it is only from moral and religious nation
this constitution that we write. it is wholely unsuited for any other. and that's not saying what kind of religion a person has to have or if they have to be religious at all. but what it is saying is that you cannot build a nation unless it is built upon a rock solid foundation. and america has that. it is the character and values of our people. and that is why i am so absolutely confident in 2012 because that hasn't gone away. in fact what i've seen is the character and the strength and the morals and the values of the american people are getting more and more excited because america has made their decision. they've decided we are going to take our country back. we are going to be our solution. we are going to be -- have a better day. and so america has decided they're in for 2012. and so that's my question to
you today here in iowa. are you in? are you in for 2012? are you going the make it happen? are we going to take our country back? i agree with you. i say we do. i'm in. you're in. we will take this back in 2012. thank you for having me here today. thank you everyone. have a great conference. thank you. >> what a great way to get back into the session. all right.
our next speak ser a good friend and i consider him a mentor in a political arena. also no stranger to victories and that's why this next man was tasked for organizing the successful campaign to oust three justices ear in iowa who attempted to break the very bond between the people and our government and that bond is the constitution. his leadership put those justices who practice judicial activism on watch not just here in iowa but around the nation. [applause] >> the iowa for freedom campaign is about the most fun i'm ever going to have on a campaign taking the three judges out and the last time i was at a podium it was a vote no which again is appropriate
since we're going to hammer home again obama care and the repeal. and this is one of the things we have to press our candidates about. you know, how far are they willing to go to strip obama care out. and so we're going to welcome back to the stage betsy mccoy. and she of course is creditted with stopping hillary care in its tracks. she has her handsful. and of course no discussion on obama care is going to be complete without the man in congress working absolutely the hardest and fighting the strongest to repeal obama care, roots and all congressman steve king. [cheers and applause]
>> thank you. on january 31, judge roger vincen, a great american, declared this law unconstitutional in its entirety, null and void. that's right. on the way to victory here. this law shreds your constitutional rights. it forces you to enroll in a one size fits all government designed health plan whether you want it or not whether you can afford it or not and it expands the powers of the i.r.s. to track you down and penalize you if you fail to comply. as judge roger vinson pointed out, nothing in the united states constitution authorizes congress to force americans to buy anything. [applause]
worse yet for the first time in history this law empowers the government to actually dictate how doctors treat privately for patients. so even if you have aetna or united or some other plan, the government is in charge of your care. here it is. it says insurance companies can pay only those doctors who follow whatever dictates the secretary of health and human services imposes in the name of quality. well that covers everything in medicine whether your cardiologist recommended a stints versus a buy pass, whether your obgyn decides to do a cesarean section. your treatments are going to be entered into an electronic data base. your doctor's decisions are going to be monitored and your doctor is going to have to choose between doing what's right for you and staying in
the government's good graces. >> now you heard the president promise that he was going to solve the problem of the uninsured by making health insurance affordable. that's not what he did. you've gotten your increases in the mail. instead, he's going to put 31% of americans below age 65 into medicaid. it's welfare reform undone. 31% of americans on medicaid. imagine that. right? and to pay for that? well, there are 410 billion in new taxes in this law. in addition, there are now talking about that new tax, the v.a. t the vanishing american tax. right? and worse yet this law pays to expand medicaid to nearly one third of americans by eviscerating medicare. . .
roger vincent went further. he declared mandatory health insurance unconstitutional and the whole law unenforceable. the drafters of this bill had argued again and again that compulsion was essential to make this complex legislation work. complex legislation generally includes a boilerplate provision. that boilerplate provision was taken out so the judge turned that argument right back at them and said you had told me that without compulsory health insurance, this law will not work. it must be like the precision watch. if one part does not work, the watch does not work. you are going to see it fall.
i am delighted to be here with congressman king. [applause] the simple truth is this and it has been with us for over 200 years. our freedom can only last as long as we have a government of limited and enumerated powers. that is what this says. limited and enumerated powers, and that is exactly what we are fighting to achieve. thank you. [applause] >> i get all energized by being here. what a tremendous fighters we have in this country. thanks betsy. [applause] i read the title and it said i am going to talk about the
repeal of obamacare. i am not talking about repealing a component of it or minimizing the scope of its. i am talking about ripping the entire malignant tumor out of the routes before its swallows up our liberty. all of it. [applause] betsy wants to put this in the shredder and turn this into a 40-page bill. >> 20 pages. go to my website, 20 pages an honest bill. >> i want to hand this back and say shred it and put it back in the street. [laughter] [applause] how do we get rid of it? i will quickly take you to the strategy that has unfolded. i mentioned it at the opening.
i spent 18 months fighting obamacare. the first 18 months was seeking to kill the bill. a part of the process was calling for press conferences at the capitol building when tens of thousands of people came from every state in america to surround the capital and make it hard for anyone to get in or out. the rules committee could not function writing the rules that allow for them to do their legislative sleight of hand. on the day that obamacare past, he could not passed the house of representatives on its own merit. it was passed on a promise of two things. that it would be a reconciliation package from the senate that would take some of -- that would take care of some of the concerns. all of that was part of the deal before it passed. the president of the united
states taking an oath of office to protect the constitution and he thinks he can amend the statute by executive order. they fell for that bait. one person and that was a part of the vote was the congressman from illinois. he is no longer in the united states congress. [applause] da we do care about the constitution. if there is a road map to take america where we need to go, the underpinnings are right here. to know that someone has a ph.d. in constitutional history here analyzing this for us, it is outstanding. [applause] a year ago we were just finishing up this process of the implementation of obamacare on america by the legislative
sleight of hand. i was the last one to leave the capital that night. i was deeply troubled. i had gone into the mosh pit the tens of thousands of people who were out there. any one of them could of been here with all of us. the best people of america has to offer with the deepest convictions. they drove all night to be there to tell them take your hands off of my health care, off of my liberty, and adhere to the constitution. it was 1:30 in the morning and walked home. i was exhausted from a marathon of doing battle on this. i thought i would lay down and sleep. i lay down and stopped about 2.5 hours and there will go, sat down at my computer, and i wrote up a bill draft request.
they had that waiting when they open for business at 9:00 in the morning. the 40 words in summary say something to this effect. that to repeal obamacare in its entirety "as if it had never been enacted." i like those words. repeal it as if it had never been enacted. that bill draft came down within the three minutes of the bill draft of michele bachmann who i did not know was working on this task. within three minutes, the exact 40 words. we went to work on this. by midsummer it emerged that the bill that i carried had a few more signatures so i filed a petition. i worked with a lot of other organizations on this.
we got to 173 signatures. they laughed at us the first week. they were starting to sweat it at the end. it was a school that was used in the november 2 election and is credited with a number of house seats that we likely would not have won if they would not have used the petition. that is part of the strategy that got us here. it was a component of winning the majority, picking up 63 seats in the house of representatives and 87 freshman republicans. [applause] whom i have described many times as god's gift to america. 87 freshman republicans. they are they're helping on all of this. "pass the repeal of obamacare."
i wanted it to be h.r. 1. it turned out to be h.r. 2. ok i am good with that. we passed the repeal of obamacare, send it to the senate where i believe we had a chance for it to pass in the senate but the political configurations were such that they did shoot it down. the house and senate has voted to repeal obamacare. everyone. [applause] in the next step, we need to shut off the funding to obamacare in every appropriations bill that comes to the united states congress. there is not a dime of federal money that can be spent if the house says no. we need to hold our ground.
we need spines. "you are not the kind of dr.." i am drawing a blank. it is the kind of stainless steel rod that the ball to york -- it is not a broomstick, it is stainless steel. everybody has to have a spine. we always knew we had to face down the president on this. this would come to a showdown with the president. if we send a message to the president that we are trying to craft legislation that he would sign, i would guarantee you this. the president is going to get everything he is willing to fight for. my message is we have to look the president in the eye and tell him we are not going to fund obamacare. we are going to do it with the
continuing resolution, and if the president vetoes such legislation, we need to tell the american people -- republicans have already demonstrated, we are going to find every aspect of government in a fiscally conservative way, and if the president vetoes that appropriation because my language is honest and cuts off the funding to obamacare if he does that, the american people will know that he trod a decision that his signature is more important to him than all the other functions of government combined. who do you think when that argument with the american people? we do. [applause] there are some in the congress that say it was so carefully written and so smartly written that we cannot cut off funding in an appropriations bill to what they call as mandatory
spending. so as we go through that argument yes, you can. i drafted the language. in the spring of 1974, the united states congress last language to shut off all funding to the vietnam war -- notwithstanding any other provision of law, no funds in this act shall be used to carry out offensive or defensive operations in the skies over the land overseas adjacent to vietnam or other countries. it shot off every dime. i disagree with the decision. now i am saying that language works to cut off funding for obamacare. [applause] if a liberal congress can shot off a war with an amendment or language written into a continuing resolution, then we can shut off the funding to
obamacare and language written into a continuing resolution, and that is what we must do, and send this message all across this land, that if we give up this point we do there are two leverage point. the continuing resolution necessary for the government to stay open, and the other one is the debt ceiling. this is the place for it to be, on the continuing resolution. the irony is if we use my language to shot off funding and the president decides they are going to shut down the government what happens? the lights go out at a lot of federal offices around the country. what keeps going? obamacare. $23.6 billion available whether there is a shut down or there is not to fund the implementation of obamacare. so i am just asking you to send
a message out across the land to every member of congress so they understand how important this is. you have to commit to stand with us. we have to challenge the president on this. if we do not come this insidious obamacare will continue to send its tentacles down into american liberty, and that is an unconstitutional taking of american liberties. thank you and i am ready for questions now. [applause] >> we do have a few minutes left to take some questions. i have to say, when i was asked to introduce this panel i was told i would be given speakers to tell what they actually thought. [laughter] we have a question over here. >> [unintelligible]
is up for reelection in 2012. would you be willing to run for the senate seat? i think we need somebody with a ph.d. on constitutional history in the united states senate. >> thank you. [applause] well it is very flattering to have my name floated around. we do need people in the united states congress and in the white house who understand the constitution, who are committed to the constitution, who know what it says, and live by it. we have a president right now who does not. our major task is to replace him with someone who loves this document which has given us over 200 years of freedom and
prosperity. [applause] >> we have a question over here. >> [inaudible] [laughter] >> my question is with the unconstitutionality of obamacare, this is probably going to end up, unless you are totally successful in what you are doing probably end up in the supreme court. we could pull this out. the obama administration has no desire to expedite anything. i contend and we should all pray for our justices, because if one should retire or pass away this thing really get bad. so let's keep our justice is in place and make sure nobody decides to retire and no change can be made because then it could go 5-for the other way.
that is my only comment something to keep in mind. >> that is an excellent comment. i think the swing vote will probably be with kennedy despite voting for big government on many issues, has shown a real passion for federalism. one of the things this law does is make state mere minions of the federal government. the whole law destroys the concept that we have a government -- a federal system with the central government that has limited and enumerated powers. let's hope that andrew kennedy considers that in his decision. >> i think that is a good idea
to pray for the u.s. supreme court justices. during the bush administration, i had a little prayer. i did not want to wish any ill will on anybody. [laughter] >> that is great. [laughter] >> oh, no. i would like to add this to the sentiment before it. these lower court rulings have given us more exposure to the fact that we need to get our good judges in it to begin with. all of the courts matter. somehow, the mandate is constitutional because it is not inactivity, it is mental
activity to choose not to purchase health care. that is just insane. >> it is very unfortunate that the media has distorted the judicial record so far. there have been five decisions in federal to show court and every single decision in which a state was challenging this health law, the decision went to the state. there were three cases very poorly argued and they should not be counted as equals. when you hear people on the news about the decisions that is not true. >> we have a question here. >> i have had those senior moment too. you are looking for the term " vertebrate." we need more vertebrates in congress. [laughter] not in vertebrates.
we definitely need a vertebrate in the white house. [applause] >> congressman november's election 63 new congressmen in the house. it changed the makeup of the senate in which the democrats did not have the big majority that they had before. over 600 senate and house representatives seats changed plates nationwide because we went forth and be elected. what are we going to have to do to convince leadership that we were serious and they better start acting on some of the things that you brought forth as well as others? how can we give them some backbone? >>[laughter] [applause] >> i think you just send a message. i would add also that every time
you can give a member of congress who is indecisive a personal experience, respectfully but if you can meet them and talk to them, that is the most powerful thing you can do. if you can talk to them on the phone and they can hear the conviction in your voice respectfully. if you can meet with their staff in their office. also on march 31, just around the corner, the tea party groups are going to converge on washington, d.c. they are going to insist the language that cuts off funding to obamacare is going to be written into the continuing resolution. your voice counts. when i look out and i see tens of thousands of people there and the effort to cut funding for obamacare becomes as strong as the effort to fight it and kill it, i think then we get
results. >> it kind of answer my question, but i am not a constituent. and i appreciate what you do. i have never been so frustrated with the representation i have. i contact them bimonthly and i get a formal letter back that is kind of sort of close to what i am trying to reiterate, but how do we get the message out to representatives who we are not constituents of? do you pay attention if i call you because i am not going to vote for you? >> i like to pay attention, but the staff load makes it such that there is a natural filter that goes in to some degree. i would say if you can have influence with friends and relatives in those districts, i would ask them to get active
also. we do have meetings with people outside the constituency. get the message through. sometimes, i am working around it too. >> when this vote was going on, i went to two offices and asked them if they had more people for or against and they had no idea. "well, we just do not know." >> another point that i think helps people to understand is if you take somebody on the other side of the aisle from where i am they build their political power base to the left. if they adhere to planned parenthood tax years rather than pay years that is where their power base is. they are not going to listen as much to someone who believes in
freedom, liberty and the constitution. we have to change them. i mean change their seat. they are never going to change. [laughter] >> i have one solution for the whole thing. ask president obama for his birth certificate. it seems like this never comes up. that bill would not matter to nothing because it would not be authorized. >> i wanted to say something about this. there is something much bigger at stake here. when i saw the administration issued 1040 waivers for certain
companies and unions, exempting them from the laws that the rest of us are zero billion that is a far greater danger. this administration has showed ignorance for the rule of law. a government that has the ability to grant a waiver has the ability to deny a waiver and destroy the business. we understand that no american should ever have to slither to the white house for an exemption. in this country, the rule of law is king. now mr. obama or anyone else that occupies the white house. that is what we have to protect above and beyond the debate over this health care law. >> we just have a couple of minutes left. >> i live in 3rd district
kansas. my congressman is one of those 63 who swept into congress but he is not one of the 54 standing with you. i see all these congressmen including you as people who speak for all of us. you represent the more than my own congressman does on this issue. would you let him know that he is being -- his people are here and work on it? the rest of you can call kevin also. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. >> i would trust that he has a google alert in his black. that will pop up in a few minutes. -- in his blackberry. >> i would like to thank you for
the flowers that are blooming in winter. they have been guiding us all along the right way for fighting obamacare. we are facing a very big liar and demoralized government. many people have been taking the progressive side because they are not aware of it. we cannot tell them any better because they chose the easy way. for example, they like to have more money for themselves or they are afraid to help. i am really glad we are here to fight back,. we need to spread the word of people who have been intoxicated by the suppressive system.
what we going to do about it? >>[applause] >> you know, i think we are doing something about it today. not only the people in this room who took time off to contribute to this, all of the people contributing to make this a successful day so far hopefully you walk out of here inspired. the people who are watching are also inspired. we never know who is going to be the spark that comes out of here who really launches something good. the road traveled would not have happened if it would not have been someone who inspired me. i think this is a part of the process. see to it that we are not intoxicated by the progressives.
we should be intoxicated by liberty. >> the comment by this latest? is a very serious one. some of the allies have become so widespread because he uses the engine of government to promote them. for example the medicare agency has sent out millions of fliers to medicare-eligible seniors claiming this lot saves medicare by reducing funding when in fact it takes the money out and put it into a different program, leaving seniors very vulnerable to lower quality care. i remember when he talked about the early elements of this law going into effect and he said preventive care will now be free. it is not free.
you have to pay up front in your premium for it whether you want it or not. these kinds of lies have done something to slow down the effort to get rid of obamacare. if everyone knew the truth there would be even fewer people supporting it. it is very disturbing to see the engines of government use it to deceive the public. [applause] >> thank you. we are out of time for this panel. i am sure it is not the last you will hear about this issue. >> there are three intense efforts to get rid of obamacare. one of them is the litigation that betsy has talked about. it is unconstitutional in four different ways. let's do everything we can to mitigate our way back to the party in the constitution. we have to do everything we do,
using the tools and our disposal, to get it appealed. of of of the state's out here, they have all kinds of wrenches that they can drop into the obamacare gears. they need to be doing that so they do not snatch this up and take over so many operations going on within the states. we can win this is the determination is out there like it is in this room. we can win this. i look forward to the day when we can say the end of obamacare. >> this is the fight of our lifetimes. we have to retake our government and protect our constitutional principles before they are lost forever. [applause] >> thank you. betsy mccaughey congressman king. [cheers and applause]
thank you. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> how about that? a great panel. this is the last chance i have to speak to you all to date. a want to thank you for everything that you do for the conservative movement. let's make a difference. monday through friday, iowans turnne into to [unintelligible] since 1988, the year agreed to win from high school, the show on who has been a hot spot for deeper understanding of the issues that confront us. we have enjoyed in joining in on the conversation about all
things cultural and political. it is said that his show is sometimes controversial. i have not noticed that. have you? [laughter] we admire him because he is not afraid of the debate. it is a reward for those who hold our constitution the year. it is made -- it is my great honor to introduce him. [cheers and applause] >> do you need some help? [laughter] poor guy. i want to be on the record. without exception congressman king is the costliestgutsiest politician
that i know. [applause] a reporter called me the other day. he introduced himself. he said he was covering iowa's caucuses. he had noticed i was at who you for a very long time. isn't it unusual for a talk-show host to last that long? i said sure. i never say anything controversial. [laughter] and and never make anybody mad. [laughter] i could hear in the background -- he was writing it down. you could hear him on the keyboard. hey, guys, here is the deal. do me a favor. if you cover for me, i will cover for you. [laughter]
the front page of the paper the other day had the following headline. "do capital preggers cross the line?" -- prayers cross the line?" what lines could possibly be talking about? the beginning of the legislature, they asked a minister to come out and toss out the opening prayer. they invited a pastor from the church of christ. included in his prayer, the following line. "lord, forgive us for not protecting the unborn, and i asked for honor to be held by this body for the institution of marriage." the sub headline of the paper
"some call for better enforcement of prayer standards ." [laughter] the des moinese register had to scour the entire country to locate a single a fees group in new jersey willing to complain. after world war two, the united states was the only healthy superpower. the whole world was a mess, war- torn. we had won the war. punctuated its end with a nuclear bomb. we had a monopoly of power. the whole world was at our feet. we wish we could, could the whole thing at the moment. we did not. instead, we rebuilt it.
after the cold war got under way, president eisenhower went to church on sunday morning and he heard a sermon about the source of american power. the minister recited the pledge of allegiance. "into the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible for liberty and justice for all." whoops. it sounds like something is missing. well the minister said the soviet union could could, with equal enthusiasm recite the pledge of allegiance. they thoughts that if a call list-communist state could say the exact things with absolute
equivalents and equality, almost the next day a motion was made to add "under god" in the pledge. i did not know that history until fairly recently. a generous thing that president obama has left out. several times now from the rights clause of the declaration of independence even after he has been told several times that he is in error. therefore, this is not an accident. this is not an oversight. it is a deliberate. it is purposeful. it is evil. [applause] a couple of weeks ago, the
subject was about birthright citizenship. i was sent a letter. harkin told him the constitution requires birthright citizenship and he quoted the 14th amendment, intentionally leaving out under the jurisdiction thereof clause which explicitly removed the whole notion of automatic citizenship with the children of foreigners. harkin erased the most important part of the 14th amendment. that is dishonest deceptive cynical, purposeful, and evil. [applause] just like obama tries to the race the true source of our
rights. back to the front page of that paper again. did the prior cross the line? well let me take you back a couple of years. a local momislamic cleric entered his opening prayer into the legislation, saying "give us victory over those who disbelieved." how does it is lumber in at the career and define an unbeliever? "they are unbelievers who say god is at the messiah, mary's son." who could that possibly be? [laughter] the representative got up the next day to dissipate some of the heat that that prayer generated, mainly from me, and
he got up and said the words were taken out of context. for that lie he was given a standing ovation by the legislature. let's see if i have this straight. a muslim cleric stands up and declares an islamic jihad against christians in iowa and that message gets a standing ovation. but a christian minister gets up and praise for the lives of babies, and the integrity of marriage that prayer is labeled as crossing the line? are you kidding me? you have to give mohammad credit. at least he understands his faith and the purpose that he had and the courage to stand up in the wreckage of our christian
culture and to pray to allah victory over christianity. at least he has a positive eschatology. that is a fancy word of a few of the future. he thinks is lomb will win in the future and all of us will eventually submit. on that day, he was right. the unbelievers give him a standing ovation. in the religion of islam moslems think all people are born is longslam. they believe that islam will conquer the earth and all people will eventually submit. they believe their cause winds in history. as i said, the have a positive
eschatology. i have talked to a number of cultural marxist over the years. they believe and communitarian and forced mandatory and egalitarianism under no animal is equal over others. perfect equality = perfect justice. they believe history is moving progressively toward those ends. irrepressible. inevitable. irresistible. that is what you hear politicians say. we have to be on the right side of history. they are using the language of cultural marxism when they talk that way. they think they win in history. they have a positive eschatology. conservative americans want to be on the right side of god.
if we are history will right itself. darndest believe we come from nothing, from this order to complexity by random chance in the power of evolution. matter self-emerging from nothing. inevitably, evolving into something better. every single day. secular progressives, therefore, have a positive eschatology. they think they win in history. a fellow the other day called while i was on the air lying to my screener thinking he disagreed with either me or bob he would never get on the air. he said bob had embarrassed by
what by trying to block same gender marriage. then he hung up. outside of the aligning cowardice, he was trying to project an attitude of triumphalism. it is the right side of history. only bigots and close minded people resist it. the gay lobby think they win in history. they have a positive eschatology. the christian men who founded this country really did have an eschatology of victory. they were convinced that christians when in history. they thought history could not come to an end unless they did.
christopher columbus was a prophecy nut. he was a bible-stomping wacko. he did not think jesus could come back as long as muslims occupied jerusalem, so he wanted to go west to find a better way and go on a fund raiser. he was looking for gold, yeah, everyone admits that but he was looking for gold to launch another crusade to liberate the holy land. he had a positive eschatology. programs thought they were building a city on a hillock -- pilgrim'ss thought they were building a city on a hill. they thought only god could consummate a coveted marriage, and they thought got word was the only basis of our civil order and by no other standard
could our god-given rights be made secure. so, they give us limited government based upon the notion of god-given rights, a constitutional republic. what happened to that? where did it go? let me tell you a story of human nature. i have told this a couple of times before, but this is one of those life-changing moment. this is the thing that unlocks a little chunk of my brain. i am going to use this story to inform a lot of my world view. a guy called me up out of the blue. mr. michaelson, i used to be a psychic. [laughter] a very successful psychic in hollywood. they called me the psychic to
the stars. psychics are bad review and it is stupid. i know you are thinking, and forget it. [laughter] i have not changed my mind, by the way. "i used to be a psychic. then i became a christian and realized i cannot do this scam anymore." "now, my mission is to expose the fraud, and here is how i am going to do it. for the first few minutes i will do my old routine and tell everybody why is a scam, why it is an act." that sounds like the plan. he is on the air. this guy is fantastic. he is pulling names and dates out of the air. the collars are going nuts. people within the buildings are
coming into the studio open to get a chance to talk to this guy because he is so good. he stopped dead in the middle of his conversation and said everything you just heard is an act, a routine. it is called cold reading. i am very good at it, but it is a fraud, totally phony. i have been around in the business for 25 years and have never witnessed a single bonafide psychic event in my life. do not believe in it. it is a scam. so i took a commercial break and then noticed the phone lines kept blinking, blinking, and plinking. nobody dropped off the line. i could not help myself. i picked up the line. diane, you are still on the line. do you have something to add?
"i would like to talk to the guest." did you not hear what he just said? "yeah." what did he just say? "he said psychics are phony. there is no such thing. nobody should believe anything he says." why are you still on the phone? "could you not just have him say something nice about me?" wow. that's it. that is the holy grail of human nature politics religion, international relations. couldn't you just haven't say something nice about me? we willingly prefer to consume a pleasant fiction than hard truth. that is our default human nature.
it is mine. it explains the success of hope and change, or "he is the one." diet books or professional wrestling, for that matter. [applause] that is the bad news. here is the good news. after a person or a country has sampled all the pleasant lies which failed to deliver, one is stuck with what is left, the truth. our culture is at that place right now. that is what we are here. eternal truths which we have neglected have not moved. they are still there right where we have left them. now it is time to go pick them up again, dust them off and use them. i am up for that. how about you? thank you for listening.
[applause] >> rose. is the director of government relations at numbers usa. it was they and their members who could claim a victory after the embassy bill was stalled in the u.s. senate in 2007. immigration issue to be a hot topic. we welcome back to iowa, rosemary jenks. [applause] >> hi, everyone.
for those of you who got do -- who do not know what numbers usa does, we are a grassroots organization. we have almost 1.1 million american members. we call ourselves and immigration reduction organization because that is precisely what we want to do. we want to stop illegal immigration and we want to reduce legal immigration. when a with thinking about what was going to say i thought i should keep it to the theme of principles. what of the principles that guide our policies? [laughter] that was kind of a problem. as it turns out, there aren't any. maybe i could talk about the principles that do not guide our policy. first, we have the rule of law of the united states of america. it clearly does not guide our
immigration policies. illegal immigration makes a joke of the roulade law. if you could get in, you can stay no problem. that is not in it. what about national sovereignty? according to a recent study from the general accountability office the united states does not have control over 56% of our border. 56%. guess who does have control? the drug cartels. so, with more than half of our border outside our control i cannot really say national sovereignty is a big issue for the folks in washington. what about the u.s. constitution? we have heard a lot about it today. the preamble says "we the people of the united states in order to form a more perfect union
established justice, insure tranquillity, provide for the common defense to promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our prosperity, do ordain and establish this constitution of the united states of america." the whole purpose of the constitution is 4 week the people come to be able to defend ourselves, to promote our welfare, and to secure liberties for ourselves and our children. it does not say that the goal is to generate profits for employers who want cheap labor subsidized by american taxpayers. it does not say that the goal is it cheap votes for democrats. when you get right down to it, those are the two things that are driving our immigration policies. clearly, the constitution is out just like sovereignty and the
rule of law. i always found that may be common sense should be one of the principles that drives our government. let's see if that applies to immigration. let's take a hypothetical family of four. let's take mom and dad lose their jobs not a stretch of the imagination since 22 million americans cannot find work right now. in a common-sense world mom and dad are probably going to tighten their belts to try to reduce their expenses. only if you live inside the washington beltway would your answer be to invite your pouror unemployed neighbors to live with you. 22 million americans can't find full-time jobs. so washington is giving permanent work permits in the form of green cards to an average of 75,000 working age
immigrants every single month. that is legal immigration. 75,000 per month to compete with 22 million unemployed americans. that does not even count the estimated 7 million illegal aliens alden non-agricultural american jobs. our social security system is going bankrupt, so washington is importing more than 1 million, mostly poor and lower- skilled immigrants each year, who will take back far more than they pay into the social security system, thereby speeding up the bankruptcy. 53% of a foreign-born households with children receive welfare benefits but washington is talking about reducing benefits for american citizens but not about reducing immigration and
slowing the importation of poverty. more than 80% of the growth in the population that does not have health insurance in the last decade is from immigration. more than 80%. yet, washington's answer is to keep importing uninsured poor immigrants and make americans criminals and they do not by the ever-increasingly cost of health insurance that they have just forced on us. so much for common sense. what is the answer to the immigration problem that we have? it is actually fairly simple. first, we have a virtually free system called e-verify that employers can use to verify that their workers are legal.
it is virtually free for the government. in fact come we could go a step further and take congressman's steve king's new act to give the irs an incentive to go after these employers. it would actually raise and [applause] in we also need to enact a birthright citizenship to end which you just heard about. it is clear to all of us that the 14th amendment says " subjected to the jurisdiction thereof." we do not need a constitutional amendment to and birthright citizenship.
we need legal change that congressman king has introduced to ensure that one parent is illegal residents. that is it. it is easy. we need to reduce unnecessary legal immigration including the ridiculous of the sell lottery. -- visa lottery. 50,000 visas per yer in a lottery? absurd. we also need to eliminate the so-called chain migration. this should serve the american interest. that is pretty simple. it should focus on first the nuclear family, spouses and minor children. anyone in this children -- in this country should be able to marry whoever they want. they should not be able to bring their cousins aunts uncles,
adult siblings, and so on. it should focus on our fair share of a humanitarian immigrants come refugees, asylum. we're taking far more than our fair share of the moment, but we should take our fair share. third, it should focus on truly extraordinary skilled workers that we actually want for our economy. we should select them based on economic need and not based on whether or not they want to come it is very easy to come up with a common-sense immigration policy and if we had the will to pass it through congress. it would pass in the current house of representatives. in one of the panels, we asked what if we could do.
we should go to our website numbersusa.com to contact your members of congress and your state legislatures. tell them what you want to do about immigration. we give you all of the information you need including a scorecard on your members of congress on their immigration record. we also now have a presidential candidate scorecard which i would really encourage you to look at because i think you may be surprised. that is all i will say on that. now i will stop and see if there are any questions in the audience. kathy is in the back waiting with the microphone. questions anyone? i can keep talking if you want.
>> my name is steven. i have gone through the immigration service. i have two adopted children, one from outside the door and one from guatemala. -- one from el salvador and one from guatemala. i am pro-border protection and i see this as a great danger. my question is who has defined the constitution in such a manner to allow such as birthright citizenship? do you realize that almost 20% of our social security money is going to mexico to payments of children of illegal aliens? that is our birthright
citizenship. the retirees of this country are financing the mexican government's to the children of illegal aliens. >> on the birthright citizenship question, the answer is that no one has actually decided that. the courts have never interpreted one subject to the jurisdiction thereof means. and is essentially a practice that came into play long before we ever had illegal immigration and any child was handed a birth certificate. until we can get the supreme court to actually decide it will remain the practice. it is insane. the last time the supreme court looked at anything like this question was in 1898, i believe, in u.s. verses ofwong
kim. the child was born to two legal residence. there was a lot to do with the chinese exclusion act and so on. two legal parents had a child. the child as a citizen. that is the decision. there's never been a decision on whether or not the children of illegal aliens are u.s. citizens. >> why not? >> what we need is the law that carsten king has introduced to be passed which will then be challenged and it will be up to the court. the courts will have to decide. you may remember after 9/11, there was a terrorist, and i forget his name, and all the sudden he was caught in afghanistan and said "you cannot send me to guantanamo because i'm a u.s. citizen." his parents were temporary visitors in the louisiana when they had him. all of a sudden when it became
convenient to him he claimed citizenship. the court accepted that. his case went to the supreme court and a variety of organizations filed amicus briefs. the quarterly ignored it. they totally ignored the whole issue. we have got to force the court to actually decide. if you look at the senate floor debate when the 14th amendment was adopted the author of the amendment said very clearly and added the language, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." he said it excluded foreigners come aliens, and "others peacoat it was clear but we need to court to decide on it. that is why we need the law that congressman king has introduced. on the social security issue you are absolutely right. we're paying a fortune and not only to the illegal alien's
children but former illegal aliens to bring their fraudulent identity documents and their pay stubs to raise social security office in mexico and say they worked in the u.s. illegally and so now they are social security benefits and we give it to them. they're not illegal anymore. as soon as they leave, they are theoretically entitled to social security benefits. and is a great system. anybody else have questions? >> do what level do you want e- verify used? what expansion and what level? >> absolutely every employer. we have used e-verify since it went live in 2005. it takes literally one minute to verify a new hire.
you type in the name, birth date, social security number, and a drop down box gives you a choice of documents. you hit sand and it gives you back an answer in stanley in 97.3 -- it gives you back an answer instantly in 97.3% of the cases. >> i hate to be cynical but i am kind of confused. all today, we have been saying that the courts have been ruling and making law. now you are in saying that we need to go to the courts to get the law. can we not use the law as it is? >> we should be able to, but the problem is that what could actually happen is a county, because it is a catch to that issue as birth certificates, some county could just stop issuing down until the parents sure proof of legal status and then the county would be sued by
the advocacy groups on the other side and it would go up the courts. one way or another the courts will be asked to interpret not to make the law but interpret -- and i know how scary that is, but it is plain english. in theory, the courts must look first to the plain language and then add to the intent of the drafters of the language. if they do either one of those things, they have to come out on our side. i will still not place any money on it. >> hello. i'm going to pose the same question that i did to the panel earlier today. i served as the southeastern director for writers against illegal aliens -- riders against illegal aliens.
what can we do? as we watch so many situations where illegal immigrants have some more rights than we do. they can basically get anything that they want to. free money, free housing anything on earth, and then when they get in trouble the worst that they will end up with is to be sent back home. personally, i would not mind free plane ticket to mexico. what can we do as an everyday drill or as my organization from this level to combat this? voting again in coming is the main thing and that is what it comes down to, but we will lose the country in the meantime. >> i will say this quickly but when i said go to our web site and pressure your members of congress, i am serious. when steve king introduced his birthright citizenship bill on the first day of this congress
we immediately started a campaign to get co-sponsors of the bill and within days i started getting phone calls from some of the freshmen members of congress saying, "how dare you have our constituents contacting nasa already about immigration?" i said, "it sure will not with that attitude." this is an instance where the status quo is unacceptable. we must act now. i said you could tell your constituents you do hear from them if you want to, but i would not recommended. go ahead. it clearly made a difference. most of those members of congress are now co-sponsors -- co-sponsors of h.r. 140. thank you all very much. [applause]
>> thank you, rosemary. we had planned a little break this afternoon but we decided that we will just slide gone through because i have asked that our keynote speaker tonight, senator demint, if he would come forward and give us a little preliminary, a teaser about what we will hear after dinner. all the way from south carolina, please welcome senator jim demint. [cheers and applause] >> thank you, steve. wow. i would have come all the way from south carolina just for that. steve mentioned about being inspired at different points in your life and it has been wonderful to sit here and be inspired by not only the
speakers but the questions. inspired mostly by the fact that you are here. in the last two years we have seen the power in america slipped out of the hands of washington politicians and back into the hands of the american people. there is no good people who hold more of that power than the people here in iowa who will help us pick the right candidate for president in the next election. [applause] i can feel a lot more at home here, and i have not met many of you, then i do in the senate, so thanks for a few minutes of common sense. what inspires me most is we'd listen talk, share ideas, and what we are hearing today is about principles. i did not hear a lot about the constitution, limited government. i do not hear enough about the values and ideas that made this country great.
congress seems to be more about expediency, what can we compromise on? not with those values are. the inspiration today, and i hope you're getting the same thing out of this, is that those consensus values the you know made this country great that you know are so prevalent all across this country and would make this country as great as it has ever been or greater if the government would just get out of the way. that is what we're hearing about here today. the fact that you have shown up means more to this country than those of us to show up in the senate every day. the power of this country should be in the hands of the people. that is where it is today and that is where it will be in 2012. i look forward to sharing with you what i think we should do about that tonight, but thank you for being here in the short opportunity to speak with you. [applause]
>> it is my honor to introduce our next speaker, herman cain. it has been a long road for herman cain. he started out as an mathematician for the navy then on to corporate america with coca-cola and pillsbury. he turned a company around, godfather's pizza, saving it from bankruptcy. from that success he was invited to the national restaurant association and soon became their president and ceo working on behalf of thousands of small businesses and entrepreneurs. herman cain was also chairman of the federal reserve bank of kansas city. i did not know that until just the other day. today, he is host of a radio talk-show in atlanta. please welcome a man who lives the american dream, herman cain. [applause]
>> thank you. thank you very much. i am thrilled to be here. our founding fathers got it right. they said, "we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal and that they are endowed by their creator" and i did not leave it out. [applause] never will. we do not need to we write the declaration of independence. we do not need to rewrite the constitution. we need to enforce the constitution of the united states of america. [applause] they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable
rights. among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. life and liberty in the pursuit of happiness is what conservatives believe, but there is an element out there called liberals" who believe that life should be controlled by another person who want to kill their unborn baby. we do not believe that. [applause] the liberals want to reduce our liberties with too much regulation, too much legislation, too much taxation. the pursuit of happiness, as a result of this liberal attacks on american, is making the pursuit of happiness more and more difficult. our job, our task to make the pursuit of happiness real again.
not for us, both for our grandchildren. the last time i checked -- [applause] it is not about us. it is about our grandchildren. the last time i checked on this american idea called the pursuit of happiness, it did not say anything about men being happy in washington, d.c. my dad did not expect the department of happy when he walked off of that small farm. he had his beliefs in god belief in himself, and his belief in the greatest country in the world and i have an announcement for the liberals. we are an exceptional nation and we will keep it that way [applause] the founders did something else
that was absolutely brilliant. i had a caller and to my radio show one night. called up and said, "i am frustrated." i asked why. he said, "i'm frustrated because i believe america is on the wrong track and i do not know what to do. i asked him if he was familiar with the declaration of independence. did he have a copy? yes. i asked him if he could find the part that said "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. he comes back and i said, "turn to the section that says "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness," and when you get there coming keep reading. when any form of government becomes destructive of those ideals, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish them. we have some altering and abolishing to do. [applause]
the founders got it right. it is within the power of the people of the united states of america to alter stuff we do not like. we do not like radical socialism that is being shoved down our throats. so we have an opportunity -- and we will, to change it because as their results of this attack on the pursuit of happiness and the american dream, we have become a nation of crises. [laughter] we have a moral crisis. we have a national security crisis. does anybody in here and know what our mission is in libya? i do not. the american people do not know. we have an economic crisis.
we have an entitlement spending crisis. i know you have heard a lot in the media about the spending crisis, but it is bigger than that. they're trying to turn around the edges, but they need to address entitlements as well as we are really going to do something about this problem. [applause] we have an energy crisis. the thing about it is we have the resources to become energy independent. we have the resources. it puzzles me why our president is in brazil loading them to dollars billion and promising that we are going to be one of their best customers for oil. he has a the other way around. we ought to develop our own oil break here. and is already here in the united states of america. and [applause]
energy independence is a reality. it can happen. only if we get government out of the way. we have an immigration crisis in go the reason that no progress has been made is quite simple. there's not one problem. there are four problems. one of the greatest things i learned being in business for over 40 years, and i know it surprises some of you, but i have not been in the politics out of so i have no previous experience holding an office. whenever reporters say "but you have never held public office before" and i say "well, all of the people in washington, d.c., have held public offices before, how is that working for you?" [laughter] [applause]
your to know if i have held public office, leadership is about problem-solving. not problem avoidance not kicking in the can down the road, but we have to get serious about fixing a problems. we have four problems with immigration. we must secure the border, enforce the laws that are there promote the past to citizenship that is already there. we just need to clean up the bureaucracy. we do not need a new path to citizenship. use the one we already have in the fourth problem is that what we did about the illegal aliens that are already here? i believe you empower the states to do with the federal government will not and cannot do. empower the states to deal with the problem on iran. [applause] it is really simple. just take the federal
immigration wall and we get to the part that says "the federal government" just add the phrase "or the states." let the states do with the government is not. then the crisis among the crises is d.o.l. not department of labor but a severe deficiency of leadership. [applause] a deficiency of leadership. the me tell you what leadership means to me and what it was when i was in corporate america and what it means to ever successful ceo and what it means to ever successful leader. that me clarify something. we have some great leaders in washington, d.c. we do not have enough of them. representative steve king is one of them. [applause]
i mean that. i am not just saying that because he is the host. senator jim demint is another strong leader, but we need the right leadership in the white house in 2012 and that is why i'm here. [applause] i did not say i was running. [laughter] i just said that is why i am here. stay tuned. leaders take people to where they would not go by themselves. that is what they do. they identify the right problems. leaders make sure that the organization has assigned the right priorities that you surround yourself with the right people.
you know, people who know how to fix stuff instead of just messing and up more. leaders put together the plans to attack the problem. this is what successful leaders do. this is what we have to do in washington, d.c. if we start to focus on the right problems, the right way the right people, with the right leadership, there is no doubt in my mind that we cannot get america back on the right track. stay informed. that is why you were here. stupid people are ruining this country. [laughter] you will notice that i do not try to be politically correct. i am just trying to be correct. [applause]
stay informed. there is so much disinformation, so many lies that go through some of the media that a lot of people who are turning out are confused. they do not know what to believe. you and i have to be the educators to help people listen. as i was telling an audience last night in new hampshire look. we are not going to save all of the liberals up there. that's just save enough of them so we can take control of the white house and the senate. that is all we have to do. [applause] saved disable. -- save the saveable. that me give you three tips to have a conversation with a liberal who will listen.
i discovered this on the radio. they would challenge me. "liberals, i have figured out they only have three tactics." their objective in every case is the destruction of something that we believe in. they only have three tactics. the next time you get in a conversation with one or you listen a liberal and conservative going at it listen. f-i-n tactics. the first is that they shift the subject. if they do not have a larger argument -- a logical arguarguments, they will shifted to, "what you think should be done in afghanistan? bush got us into iraq." we are not talking about iraq.
they shift the subject. every time. second they ignore the facts. facts. nearly $1 trillion in spending has not turned this economy around, then they are ignoring the fact that spending has failed. we cannot spend our way to prosperity. we must grow our way to prosperity with a direct stimulus by allowing workers to keep more money in their paychecks, allowing businesses to keep more of their money on their sheets come and get government out of the way to stop overtaxing us so we can stimulate the economy. that is a direct stimulus. not in direct stimulus. they ignore the facts. president obama sold the
american people, at least the did not sell all of us, on the stimulus spending by saying a lot of it would be used for "schaeuble-ready projects." -- "shovel ready projects." one and a half years later he says there is no such thing. how stupid does he think we are? we are not that stupid. it is an insult to the american people. they ignore the facts. unemployment is going to come down below 8%. no, it has not. the economy is going to recover. no, it has not. it has stabilized. do you want to know why? i said on three corporate boards or when i did until last week. when you consider running for president, you become
unemployed. i did not regret it at all. let me tell you what corporations are doing. they were on a productivity blitz and they succeeded in stabilizing the economy. do not by the rhetoric that things are ok and this economic growth is going to take off. it is not going to happen. they ignore the fact that this economy is not truly in the turnaround when our g.d.p. growth last year was 2.6% and the year before it was 2.1%. china is growing 10% year over year and in the 15-20 years they will have a g.d.p. the same as ours. i consider that a national security threat. we have got to outgrow china and not sing it kumbaya out with them. [applause]
the third thing -- they shift the subject, ignore the facts and they named col. -- and they name call. i have been associated with their tax movement, americans for prosperity, the tea party all of them. because i describe myself -- i do not like people to label me. i've labeled myself. this is america. i used to tell my callers when they wanted to call up and assign a label to me i would say, "let me tell you how i described herman cain. i am an american blackett, conservative -- -- black conservative a b c and proud of it." i'm an a-b-c. because i had been affiliated
with the conservative movement and had the audacity to do a radio talk-show and grow conservative principles, i have been called a racist. go figure. i have not figured that one out yet. i have been called a whole lot of other names as well for being conservative because i will not stay on the democrat plantation just because of the color of my skin. it is not about color. it is about content and character [cheers and applaise] it ain't about color. [cheers and applause] and for those people -- [applause]
and for those people who believe that just because you disagree with the president that it makes you a racist i have two observations for you. number one if you are black and disagree with the president, i have told some of my callers that it may shock you, but some black people can think for themselves because it is not about color. and number two if we ever reach a point where we can criticize constructively, our elected leaders, we are no longer your public are founders intended. we have become a nation of tyranny and some of us are not going to let that happen on our watch. we will not let it happen. [applause] we are in the process of taking
this country back. we're boy to take back the senate and the white house. we have to stay informed and stay involved and state inspired. you see the liberals want us to believe that we cannot take it back. on november 2nd, we showed them that the movement is on. game on. we now have to take back the senate and the white house. stay inspired. do not let them tell me that the citizen movement is going to die down. not from what i have seen all over the country. it is getting a bigger and stronger. let me tell you a few things that inspire me. i have time to share one of them, but i have a whole list of them. when the biggest things that inspires me is back in 1999, my first grandchild was born.
january 22nd, 1999. i go to the hospital just in time for the blessed arrival. i went in to deliver the room -- in the delivery room and i asked my daughter how she was doing. she was doing fine. how is the baby? she is fine. would i like to hold her? of course. i took this little 15-minute old baby in my arms, looked into that face, and the first thought that crossed my mind was "what do i do to make this a better world?" that was 12 years ago. a few months ago, i finished a long board. -- board meeting and my good friend was taking me to the airport to go do another speech
at another rally. i was tired hungry, and i said to my friend "joel, have i lost my mind thinking about running for president?" he said "no." i should go home and be comfortable like everyone else. he reminded me of matthew 25:4 where we are all asked to use our talents to the best of our ability. then, five seconds later right after i was complaining i got a text from my granddaughter "love you paw paw." i told him to take me to the
airport because i had gotten my second wind. [applause] let me finish sharing with you why i believe that we're going to take back our government and put this country on the right track. it is really simple. the founding fathers did their job. it is now up to us to be the defending fathers of the greatest country in the world. but in being the defending fathers of the greatest country in the world the spirit of the american people that i called the sleeping giants have a weekend. with the liberals do not want to believe is that split -- this sleeping dry does not going back to sleep. it is the same spirit that started this country, the same spirit that kept this country together during the civil war the same spirit that got us for
world war i, the great depression, through world war i i, and the civil rights struggles. it is the same spirit that has awakened a today that will take back our government. abraham lincoln said it best. "america is never going to be destroyed from the outside. if we falter and lose our freedoms, we will have destroyed ourselves." we have an announcement for all of the liberals. the united states of america is not going to become the united states of europe. not on our watch. [cheers and applause]
>> outstanding. now we are going to take a look at our conservative principles from a little bit of a different angle. to discuss the role and responsibility of the mediuma especially during the caucus season, we're going to bring some gentleman out to discuss their perspective of our conservative principles. our first speaker, i would like to welcome back our friend from who, jan mickelson.
[applause] our next gentleman is from l.a., so there is a unique perspective it is a daily radio show that extols the freedom liberty, and capitalism. the syndicated show is broadcast on the all patriots media network and you can listen at 5:00 p.m. monday through friday on the am radio or on allpatriotsmedia.com. he works his way through exposing mainstream media hypocrisy. he is the los angeles tea party founder and is the post of "conversation with tony katz."
ladies and gentlemen, tony katz. [applause] most of you know our next gentleman. he has been to the campaign cycle, local the presidential from ground game to fund- raising, but there is a new perspective and a new media that did not exist during the last crocus. -- last caucus. we have the editor. [applause] again, i think we will have ajan say a few words on the media role on responsibility.
>> in iowa, we take the role of the screener of the next role of american leadership very carefully. whether in print, broadcast, or television journalism, i learned really quickly but i came back come to iowa that we are part of the process and that by what people in general love to be engaged. they pretend not to pay attention, but they really do. as we get closer to the caucuses, they start to flex political muscle. i live to be part of the conduit of that and get a chance to be a part of the process. i get all kinds of feedback and now with credit doing so much with other forms of media things have changed so drastically in just the few years. there are many more observers in
the process than possibly imagined. we keep adding new voices and the country gets smaller and the communication process is speeded up. i have gotten three or four emails or tweets in the past few minutes sharing this experience. c-span has made local politics national politics and the whole country is paying attention to what we do and say here. it elevates our responsibility even higher. as this conversation progresses, i think we will be able to demonstrate that. >> my name is tony cats. it is a pleasure to be here. the woman cried when she realized that there were conservatives in los angeles. [laughter] trust me when i say that i am
not the only one. there are a tremendous amount of conservatives in los angeles. he has positively no idea. you take hollywood and step on it like it should be and the rest of los angeles is it with you, iowa. it is a pleasure to be here. have no fear. my mother will be so proud that i got applause in iowa. i look forward to getting into the conversation with people who are from the iowa scene and how strongly you look at iowa first because that is the basis of the conversation. a couple of things that i wanted to get out, two things that have happened over the course of 29 hours i have been in iowa, my first trip ever. one congressman from michigan is outside and he has this wonderful book.
he is not paying me to say that. you should buy this book if for no other reason that if you have a wobbly coffee table that it will straighten it out. it is fantastic. he is selling the book and he signs it if you want him to. i wanted it to be valuable so i also had it signed by congressman steve king. [applause] that would teach him for making fun of me on twitter. i am a radio talk show host. my show is on in the texas arkansas, and florida. i host "the conversation with tony katz" which is for pajamas media pjtv.com and i also blog on obamamustnotwin.com.
you have been making that noise all day. a heck of a job you have been doing. i will wrap up quickly so that we can move forward but i got to iowa, found out where the local cigar bar was the best steakhouse and i realized that if i was had a board of tourism that they should be fired and a horse with the. if you think it is too extreme they should be fired. there are a lot of interesting things going on here. there is legalized gambling. no one that told me this. it was not in the brochure. it is with that same kind of thing the things that i did not know about iowa, that i come to this conversation about by war
first. i want to have this conversation with paul levy. iowa which takes this seriously, does a very poor job of explaining to the rest of the nation why it should be first here. when you see the fight from florida and other states about moving up their primaries it is because as jan said, messaging and moving media why i was first? what have you done to make the rest of us believe that the responsibility should be yours and you are the only ones capable up to, and a deserving the task? thank you for indulging me. [applause] >> that is one can of worms i could go on for an hour. my name is craig robinson. if you have not been to the
website, i hope you will check it out. to describe my role, when tony points out someone whooping, my role is to tell you that is joni from cedar rapids. everyone should know her. [applause] we love you. i guess someone to go into this conversation about why i was since it was to have that conversation a-. -- why iowa? since you want to have that conversation. first, let's start off with i think there is only one thing in this state overall that i with democrats and republicans will agree on. we work together very hard to keep our first in the nation
status. as the political director of the republican party during the last caucuses we had a great relationship with the guys across the street in preserving this process. i want to hear other people's input, but this is the reason why it is necessary for i wish to go first because only in a state like -- necessary for iowa to go first is because in a state like iowa it is about you. the media will obsess on a candid it and the media attention of just wonder two particular candidates. everyone has a chance here. i know we were prepared with questions about who do you take seriously, do you treat every presidential candidates equally? i will answer that. no you don't.
i take the candidates seriously that you take seriously. those are the ones who deserve coverage. if we remember back to this time four years ago everyone laughed that a guy named huckabee was going to run for president. they were not laughing on january 3rd. we won -- he won. from my perch at the party and it wasn't clear as day. -- from my perch it was clear as day. the national media was trying to catch rabbits. when i the get what candid itates i will take seriously there has not been one that i did not think you are interested in today. there are some running him may
not be interested in you and in turn you're not interested, well that will affect my coverage. the one thing we need to remember about new media is that just because you are not here campaigning and asking for our vote does not mean we do not know what you are up to or are about. try as they may, they may want to run it to the comfort of new hampshire and try to start their campaign there but we are following them and i am pretty sure they will show up when we had to reschedule national debates, so they cannot totally ignore s. when they come to a state like iowa what do you think they will be asked? why do not want our vote? there are a lot of misconceptions about iowans and through my role on the website and interviews i do with other
members of the media i tried to dispel some of the mets. all we care about our social issues. i disagree. i think we care about an awful lot of issues. if you ever went to a campaign event, you would realize that. we went to make sure the candidates we are looking at are pro-lifer and pro-marriage. then we start to look at where they rank and other issues. the intensity of their support on those issues matter to us. the notion that all we care about is that is wrong. we want to leave time to interact with you, the audience. anything that we can do in terms of answering questions or any topics you would like to delve into, i think we would entertain that. >> is it your responsibility to give equal access to all the candidates running for office?
you did not have been the responsibility at all. i, on the other hand, half to at least prepared to give equal access. i tried to do that. i usually hate that process because it is a lower-level political office candidates at the lower level offices are not that dynamic especially some of the county offices from obscure counties here in iowa. if i had to interview everyone from obscure house or senate districts, i would not last very long because my audience would be gone. then we would need a bailout and then we would have to change the call letters to npr. [applause] i agree that this process is fine.
politicians get to the idea where he/she are ready for president and prime time, they are world class personalities. they by nature, draw people to themselves. there is not a non-type a personality -- well, jimmy carter. [laughter] most of the candidates are not only fun to talk to but they are good radio. >> i agree. [laughter] do we want to start with questions? >> i just want to add it to something craig touched on being involved in the party drew the last cycle that a lot of people do not know. for those in the national audience here is some education. we were inundated with the
dozens and dozens, and dozens of candidates that were demanding to be put on the iowa caucus ballot. as you know, there is no valid. this is that the secretary of the state and county auditor's putting this on. this is a party-building exercise. when we are talking to a national media about the iowa caucus that is the first thing they need to get through their head. this is not an election. they had it their checkbooks in hand and were demanding to be put on the ballot. when we tell them there is no valid, they threaten to sue. that is generally the reaction. >> i am here from the other iowa. i believe the great advantage iowa and new hampshire and bring
it is that we are small. they have to put in the legwork. they have to come out and meet us, make an impact. there is a saying in new hampshire, and said that you have one like it, and it is, "i will not vote for him up. he has not shaken my hand yet." we will fight for the death -- to the death for your rights. small is beautiful. >> i could not agree more. in a state like iowa, we had 118,000 caucus as republicans in 2008 which set a record for us. i would say that all 118,000 probably should a candidate's hand. it is about as retail politics
you can get. when you make of the retail politics, it is not about how much money you raise. i think that is the one beauty and why we should go one and two. >> allow me. i am not from iowa. canyon not shake hands with the people of florida? -- can you not shake hands? can i shake the hands of the people of rhode island? but the conversation is about size. we go to rhode island and then connecticut. my point being, not to put you on the spot, or iowa, but what is the value? we talk so much in the conservatism and tea party that it is principal and not a party. that is explaining what is happening. there are people who are in the
republican party to do not represent the principles that we ascribe to. what is it about iowa new hampshire, too but iowa, and what is it available for you the ability to start weeding people out? it >> i think the reason it works in both states is that both states and the people and you in the audience take this process very seriously. i had an experience in 2007 when the iowa caucuses were over. three of us in the state party went to nevada to help them in the final week to prepare for their caucuses. to be honest with you, they were
not prepared for them. it was a complete mess. the people out there were some what interested and some what not. what i would ask is, if the people of rhode island or any other small state, if you had a conference like this, would there be 500 people sitting in the seats for eight hours? no. they do not take it -- we take this so seriously that we are almost one year out and we are all sitting here. we are scratching our heads and getting to know these candidates and wondering why they have not been here more. we demand to see them over and over. are they consistent in their positions or are they just selling me something? we take this so seriously and that is what separates iowa and new hampshire from any other state. it is not just that, we get the privilege of going first.
it is that we have the responsibility to vet these candidates. we will turn out in the dead of winter and to go support who we believe in. i do not believe that kind of fire in the belly exists in other states. >> in iowa, we are different from a primary state. we are a caucus state. that means politics is extremely local. we do not have a primary system where we cost everyone into the wind and whoever emerges at the end of the night wins. if there is someone important to a particular candidate, they go to every particular caucus site. it is intense. it is personal. with the possible exception of a handful of extremely well in doubt candidates, it is almost impossible to buy.
it is possible to committed to organize trade isn't that what the whole process of politics is -- it is possible to community organizers. isn't that what the whole process of politics is? if someone is doing the exact same thing, the case will either be made or not. depending on how to compress of the organization is, you will be able to convince that -- depending on how impressive the organization is, you will be able to convince that many more people. it is harder to buy here in iowa because the process is de centralized. -- decentralized. it is a non-representative state. the process has radicalize the
politics of iowa. -- radicalized the politics of iowa. they are far right and left of the mainstream. moderate do not make history. it is only unhappy people who make history. [laughter] we have a lot of unhappy people in iowa. [laughter] >> let's take another question. >> i am a student at iowa state university. we have the liberal professor atmosphere that we contend with every day and we are fighting back against that. we have a nice group here today of college republicans. i would like to know your advice to us on how we can come back using media tactics and grass-
roots organizations -- grass- roots organizing in the 2012 cycle. i also want advice given to the grandparents and parents in this room on how they can get their kids and grandkids and bald and keep the liberal professors -- grandkids indoctrinated and keep the liberal professors' indoctrination from seeping into that brain? >> it is a great question. it is a question that goes to my question. how do you sell the country on this idea. maybe some of you say we do not have to sell the country on this idea. maybe that is the answer. when i hear people talk about the money or the seriousness -- i will get to your thing. i do not accept that the people
of rhode island's or delaware are not serious people. what i accept -- people of rhode island or delaware are not serious people. the people have got you systems that are more in line with the values based on the society that is iowa. that is an interesting concept and constructs. talking about being middle of america. people said, i am love living in des moines. i could be in denver in no time. you cannot say that in many other places. because you can do that, your world is much larger than people from the east coast or the west coast of los angeles.
people from los angeles are not from california, they are from los angeles. they prove to you they are not from the five boroughs, which proves they cannot afford to live in manhattan. you are from iowa. i live in the morning. i live in iowa. there is something about the culture about how you are naturally place that makes you a worthwhile first choice. i will continue the conversation to you a first choice. twitter, facebook, blogs a video. the only way you move a message in this world is to get up and move the message. there is nothing else.
you ask a question about the grandparents. you know longer have the luxury or excuse of saying i am too old for that. i do not know how to use twitter or facebook. if you can say to me, you are not capable the young generation will say, why should i bother. you will get four more years of obama. the days of not being able to use technology are over. grandparents will go to their grandparents -- their grandchildren and say, how do you use twitter? they will look at you like you are crazy. it is that circular motion that will allow them to be involved in the process, it to their grandkids and about in the process. the next thing you know a conversation is taking place and we wins in 2012. -- win in 2012.
[applause] i would also encourage you to get involved in one of these campaigns. these candidates are going to be asking for your vote. it is not good enough to sit on the sidelines and say, i like that guy. find someone you are passionate about and get involved. in 1999, i graduated college in may of that year. i had a serious girlfriend who is now my wife. she was 2 years behind me. i look her and said, i will get this political bug out of my system. i will go work on a presidential campaign. i really like steve forbes. i went and worked on the steve forbes campaign. there are lots of steve forbes people in here. i was really passionate and
involved in politics in my college. i took that and i went and worked in it. i did not know what pat iowa was on. i still do not know what pat i am on. -- what path i am on. i still do not know what path i am on. get involved. it sucks to be upset about your country and not lending your voice. get involved in one of these campaigns. >> there is another factor to this fellow's question that is important. i thought i heard an element of resignation that universities have to be liberal institutions that because they are tenured that is the way it is. i reject that notion. they did not build the
university. it was not their money that did it. it is a wholly owned subsidiary of the taxpayers. it is an insult to our culture that we educate our kids, in some cases home school them, and put all of the effort into your and our kids only to -- into rearing our kids only to hand them off to a pay again. -- to a pagan. [applause] what got me fired up is what i saw happening in wisconsin a few weeks ago. i hate to use the word up, but it resonates with me. -- thug. when they march and scram this is our house. bull hockey.
that house belongs to the taxpayers. they never owned that house. the education system has been taken over by the same people. i am tired of this. while we are reclaiming the political class, we need to reclaim our social infrastructure. [applause] >> we have a question over here. >> this is a question on the last election cycle when obama was elected. the media also job in iowa is to bring out what the particular candidates are all about. we never did find out what hope and change was until after he was elected. i remember seeing some newscasters on the national media just before he was elected saying he never -- they never knew anything about him. i thought it was your job, at least jan mickelson's job, to
find out what we are going to do to make sure that does not happen again. >> i fully accept the task. but you may not remember that during that cycle i was playing that sound bite almost on a day to day basis from the rev. wright's church in this chicago. this guy is collected -- the sky is connected to louis farrakhan. -- this guy is connected to louis farrakhan. i played that over and over again. we are about to buy into the most radicalized candidates in the history upper radicalized candidates. his hope and change construct is
vapor and air decide to sell in the people in the cheap seats. it worked in their party because hill we did not come out to iowa. -- because hillary did not come out to iowa. the obama organization was superb. he does represent fairly well being radicalized democratic party in iowa. he won the democratic nomination here in iowa. he is totally reflective of the dow use of the iowa democratic party. -- reflected of the values of the iowa democratic party. >> barack obama did not lie to us or the democrats about what he was going to do. the democrats have been running on socialized health care.
howard dean almost one and the state until he crashed and burned. -- almost won the state until he crashed and burned. iowa made the mess and in 2012 it is our job to clean it up. [applause] >> tony, this is an answer for your question about why iowa. i am 60 years old. since i was 21, i have had more lunches and breakfasts with potential presidential candidates then you have had an opportunity to interview. i have asked those questions to those individuals that no reporter will ask.
i have demanded an answer from them. unlike in other parts of the country, i hired a young man from detroit, a young black man. he can to iowa and he said, is there a future here for me and my children -- he came to iowa and he said, is there a future for me and my children? i said, when you drive across iowa what do you see? he said, i see as far as i can see. i said, what do you see in detroit? he said, i see the building across the street with the windows knocked out of them. that is the procession of people in big cities. we and i was seeing the world. we do not see an individual place our community. -- we in iowa see the world. >> that is the message. but you do not do a good job of telling the country about that message.
when the country looks at questions why iowa -- what is your name? >> steven everly. >> i will say steven everly. what do you see when you come to iowa? you see as far as you can see. you can do whatever it is you want to do. the land of freedom the land of liberty is right here in iowa. there is a reason we still pick who will be president. we still see. we have not been shut down. that is what needs to be pushed on video and push to kids who are going to college. that is a great message. [applause] >> we are out of time with the
panel. we have to move on to the next one. come on. >>jan told me earlier that this was the charisma impaired panel. >> just because this is all about you guys. at my booth, we are doing some e-mail signups. i am also curious what your first and second choice for president is. i would love to know who is on your mind and who you support. thank you. >> the last thing you should know. if you are interested in advancing a political cause you would be surprised how easy it is to get access to media. media is starving for material and for new insights and for
personality and for things to talk about and things to share it with. i work at a place that is hungry to talk to people about all of these things. we savor the opportunity. i know we are viewed here in iowa as an institution. whoa radio is like the electric company. -- who radio is like the electric company. a lot of times, we do not know stuff because you figure we already know. if there is something you think we need to talk about, call us. e-mail us twitter us. we are as accessible as it gets. that is a commitment we make to you. [applause] >> let's hear it for jan mickelson tony katz, greg robinson. -- craig robinson.
[applause] >> okay. it is an absolute honor for me to introduce our next speaker ambassador john bolton. [applause] you can trace his conservative roots at least to his running a students for goldwater campaign. after a legal career, he served three republican presidents beginning with ronald reagan. it was during his time at the justice department that he was tasked with shepherding justice scalia through his confirmation process. he served both bush administration's. s. it was during the tumultuous senate commission hearings that
senator joe biden compared sending john bolton to the u.n. to send in a bull threw a china shop. -- sending a bullet through a china shop. it may be the nicest thing anyone has ever said about john bolton. at a time when we have not had a full discussion -- would have to have a discussion on what america is in decline. it is critical that u.s. foreign and national security is part of the debate. we have no one better to discuss these issues and our next speaker. a big welcome for john bolton. -- ambassador john bolton. [applause]
>> thank you very much. they all of you for staying here all day. i want to thank steve king where the opportunity to join you today. this has been a fantastic events. you have heard from a lot of fascinating speakers. i would like to turn the discussion to national security. i want to assure you that i am acutely aware that me and thad are the only ones standing between you and a well-deserved dinner. national security is absolutely critical as we look toward 2012. the political commentariat like to say it does not affect their lives. it has direct and tangible a facts on our independence, our freedom, on peace and security,
the independence we need to preserve our constitution and our sovereignty freedom against foreign economic domination, and peace and security through protecting ourselves from international terrorism the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and other threats. it is true that foreign policy and national security on told differently than domestic policies and the bay. things do not wait on our schedule -- differently than domestic policies and debate. it is like humphrey bogart said in open with casablanca." . it seems that fate has taken a hand. on january 20, 2009, when it came to national security matters when president obama
took the oath of office, he was not qualified to be president of the united states. [applause] today, more than two years later, he is still not qualified to be president of the united states. this reflects a crisis in american international leadership. we ask ourselves why does the president perform this way? there are a couple of reasons. first, he does not care much about national security. it is not what motivates him. it makes him the first president, republican or democrat since france and roosevelt woke up on december 7 1941 -- since franklin roosevelt woke up on december 7 1941 not to put national security first. he did not want to talk about the global war on terrorism.
he did not want to talk about the threats we face. he called iran, a tiny country as if a tiny country with a few nuclear weapons cannot to ruin your day. [laughter] he feels comfortable with the notion of america in decline with america and not taking the leading role to protect its own interests. this does mark him as a different kind of president. in the days gone by, a president with those characteristics might have become an isolationist. not to this president. he is the oldest example of multilateralism in the operation. we can see it today in the way he is handling the crisis in libya. this is an attitude that very gravely threatens american sovereignty over the long term. sovereignty is a concept people debate over. a lot of people think it is
abstract. in the united states, we understand exactly what sovereignty is. it is not an attack -- not an abstraction. our constitution says, we the people. we are a sovereign here. you hear suggestions that we share sovereignty or cede sovereignty to international organizations. it is like saying, you have too much control over your own government. that is a truly remarkable statement that everyone in this room rejects. not barack obama. he is fascinated by international law. he talks about it all the time. on monday, you will hear more about it. it is something that does not receive the kind of attention it should. a lot of it is said by academic law professors. get the connection -- who like to theorize about these things. let me give you an example.
in 1999 during because of low prices the secretary general of the -- kosovo crisis, the secretary general said the following -- and less -- we are on a dangerous path to anarchy. i would like to hear our president say whether he agrees with the former u.n. secretary general or not. i think legitimacy or the united states comes from itself. we do not need to ask anyone else if we are permitted to use force. [applause] all this talk about international law -- we need a president that will say unequivocally that in the secular matters for americans there is no higher authority than the united states constitution. [applause]
our present it seems to have trouble with this. i think that is because he is our first post-american president. it is a carefully chosen phrase. i did not say unamerican or anti-american. i said post-american. he is beyond all that patriotism stuff. he is a citizen of the world. he doesn't believe in american exceptionalism. he does not accept the unique role for america. he was asked on his first trip to europe if you believe in american exceptionalism. he said, yes i believe in american exceptionalism just as the british believe in. exceptionalism and the greeks believed in greek exceptionalism. carefully done. when he gets in the first third of the sentence he took back in the second 2/3.
he could have continued. just as the new guineans believe in new guinean exceptionalism. if everybody is exceptional nobody is exceptional. that is the obama approach. this is not the first major leader in the democratic party to hold this view. it is the first major leaguer to become president. it is similar to what george h. w. bush said in 1988 about his democratic opponent that year, governor michael dukakis. bush 41 said my opponent sees america as a another pleasant company on the united nations role call. you could say the same thing about barack obama. what should the republican
rethought -- republican response be? certainly it is not doing nothing in the international sphere. it is not isolationism. but neither is it succumbing to the woodrow wilson in view of the president or others in our political debate. the answer is not multilateralism. protection and security for the united states are not going to be thought in the united nations system. nor is it and in this wi-- endless wilsonian crusade. let's not or get bitter roosevelt's response to wilson. he said, first we are to make the world safe for ourselves. that is the policy we should be pursuing. on a subject i know is a sensitive one i want to be
clear here. the way we do that is to pursue the policy of peace through strength. that means sufficient budgetary expenditures for our military that no adversary dared to challenge us anywhere in the world. -- pudares to challenge us anywhere in the world. there is waste and fraud in the defense department. of course there is. it is part of the governments. we should find the waste and fraud and root it out. we need to plow that money back into our dispense expenditures. the obama administration has already cut $300 billion, our defense base line. a couple of months ago the secretary of defense proposed $78 billion more expenditures. it will have to keep that level of defense spending up, i am
privately happy to find offsetting domestic programs that cut even more deeply than some have proposed. -- deals look perfectly happy to find domestic programs that cut even more deeply than some have proposed. -- perfectly happy to find domestic programs that cut even more deeply than some have proposed. let's run through some important issues we are facing now. how about the war in libya that our nobel peace prize-winning president announced last week. of course it is not war. how could it be war? he cannot keep that nobel peace prize. this is the verbal nonsense that reveals the utter lack of clarity in the president also thinking. i believe that the united states has a strategic interest in removing muammar gaddafi from power.
if we do not, there is every prospect he will return to international terrorism of the kind that brought down pan am 103 over lockerbie scotland that killed many americans on their way home for christmas vacation. he would almost certainly return to his pursuit of nuclear and chemical weapons. we cannot allow that to happen. had we intervened early promptly, and decisively, we could have tipped the balance of power to the opposition side. this thing could be over by now. his inability to understand that risks a long-term involvement with no clear conclusion. for what reason? we do not know what his objectives is? protecting innocent civilians? how can you protect innocent civilians when you cannot use military force to remove the thing that is the greatest threat to the innocent
civilians? he said in el salvador -- he said referring to the international coalition, it means we have confidence we are not going in alone. it is our military that is being volunteered by others to carry out missions that are important not only to us, but are important internationally. our military is being volunteered by others? who is the commander in chief here. i think the answer going forward is to do what ronald reagan did in 1986. our military has a wonderful euphemism called national command authority. it is a legitimate military target. in libya muammar gaddafi is national command authority. i think that is the answer right there. [applause] libya certainly has our attention.
there is came out in the rest of our middle east policy as well. the president had four different positions on hosni mubarak before he finally left. the idea that we are on the easy path has already been defeated by ebay in the last few days. let's not lose -- it he did by the events in the last few days. -- defeated by the events of the last few days. this is not an abstract strategic argument. if you have been to the gasoline station recently, you can see the forecast of what would happen if iran got complete control over those oil-producing regions. a company that serves as the world's central banker of international terrorism, that is close to achieving is 20 year- long objective of deliverable nuclear weapons -- we have no
policy on iran. we cannot find ways to support the opposition forces to mop mood, then a job -- to mahmoud ahmadinejad. if iran can get a pro-iranian regime in that country it can threaten saudi arabia and our other arab allies in the gulf and our economy will be held in complete jeopardy at mahmoud ahmadinejad's discretion. the instability in the middle east that is to undermine the stability we have saw for decades, which is peace between israel and its arab neighbors. there is every likelihood a new egyptian government will revise the camp david accord and israel's security will be threatened once again. our forefathers, when they came to this country often referred
to america as a city on a hill, quoting scripture. they referred to america as the new jerusalem. i think it is critical that the new jerusalem not forget the old jerusalem when it comes under pressure. that is exactly what we see today. look at the other threats, the continuing threat of north korea's nuclear weapons program, the increased belligerence of china its territorial claims in the east and south china sea that threatened the nations of southeast asia, its continued protection of north korea and the nuclear weapons program there. look at russia and its increased assertiveness. when he was still president vladimir putin said the greatest catastrophe of the 20th century was the collapse of the soviet union. most of us think that was a great way to end the 20th
century. he has a different point of view. he has been pursuing that policy with great vigor threatening our friends in western europe enough their oil and natural gas supplies. we have only a few months when we think about it until the 2012 election. we need a sustained and on limiting discussion of the failures of the obama administration -- unlimiting discussion of these failures of the obama administration -- unremitting discussion of the failures of the obama administration. wherever the standard of freedom and independence has been our shall be uncurled - unfuer
led. she is the champion and indicator only of her own. thank you very much/ . [applause] >> in 2002, thaddeus was first elected. he serves on the house committee on finance and services as well as the republican house policy committee. i am a particular fan of his appearances on red eye. we appreciate him making the trip to iowa this weekend. please give a warm iowa welcome
2 congrressmen thaddeus mccotter error. . >> it is great to be here in iowa. this is the first time in my life i have ever stepped foot in your state. i hope -- i heard steve king was putting on potus-fest. i asked if i could come by and shot my wares namely my book -- shop my wares, namely my book. i drove in last night from detroit. and eight and a half hour trip. i came by myself. people ask me why would you do that? i said, if you spent eight and half hours in a car with me, it would violate the geneva
convention. [laughter] but it was well worth the trip. i have had an opportunity to meet many of you some of whom don't dislike me intensely. i wanted to take the opportunity to talk about the book and why i wrote it. i wrote it for two reasons. the first is i would do anything other than having to finish my honey-do list that my wife leaves me. the second is more important. it is because we live in a chaotic time. from london to wisconsin from libya to yemen, all around the globe we see violence, disorder, chaos. we ask, what can we do about it? how can we ensure that the
exceptional nation we have inherited can be bequeath to our children --a quick -- bequeathed to our children? it is my belief that this generation of americans faces challenges that mirror those that were faced by the greatest generation. when you think about it, the greatest generation is aptly named because they transcended a trio of crises. they defeated an enemy in a world war. they defeated the rise of the soviet union at a strategic threat and rival model of governance. they addressed and resolved the question of whether the
constitution of the united states applies to all citizens equally regardless of race. we face the social and economic upheaval of globalization. we face a world war against an evil terrorist enemy. we face the rise of the communist chinese superstate as a rival model of governance. we face the question of whether or not a nation built upon self- evident truths can survive more relativism. the reason in which we find so much chaos today is that, unlike the greatest generation, who faced and conquered their challenges and secondly, we must face and transcend our challenges as they occur simultaneously. as a member of the republican party, i know our party does not
blanche from the challenges before it. our party embraces the challenges before it. unlike the so-called progressive we are not trying to fight to sustain the past. in the challenges of globalization, nothing could be more clear. we live in what is called a consumer-driven economy. i want you to think about the changes that entails. if you consider general motors in the 1970's, near and dear to my detroit cars, it was a highly centraliz